[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4F8333BC.3050509@windriver.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2012 14:08:44 -0500
From: Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@...driver.com>
To: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
CC: <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][REGRESSION] panic: fix stack dump print on direct call
to panic()
On 04/09/2012 01:34 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
>> The proper way to resolve the problem that original commit tried to
>> solve is to avoid printing a stack dump from panic() when the either
>> of the following conditions is true:
>>
>> 1) TAINT_DIE has been set (this is done by oops_end())
>> This indicates and oops has already been printed.
>> 2) oops_in_progress> 1
>> This guards against the rare case where panic() is invoked
>> a second time, or in between oops_begin() and oops_end()
> Oops. I guess can just revert it for now. Thanks for catching, Jason.
>
> The proper solution is probably some variant of
> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/ak/linux-mce-2.6.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/mce/xpanic
>
> Let the caller pass in the proper action instead of all these hacks.
That is an interesting patch series, but I am not sure I agree about the caller propagating a flag to control what you see in panic. I intentionally set CONFIG_DEBUG_VERBOSE=y for a reason, I want a stack trace if and when panic(), oops, BUG, etc... is ever called. This might be a personal preference, but I do not wish to be searching on a string, to find out where the kernel execution terminated. I want to see stack traces all the time, with the exception of the cases you pointed out in the original patch.
I had taken the time to instrument and the edge cases for the oops and panic() nesting. I would agree that it is not useful to print further traces if the kernel has already processed an oops. I also checked non-x86 archs to see that the original behavior was intact with the new version of the patch. My opinion is that checking for the panic recursion is a necessary evil here, we just have to agree about the right approach. :-)
Cheers,
Jason.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists