[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20141103215106.GC10501@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2014 22:51:06 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: arapov@...il.com, poros@...hat.com,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, matt@...sole-pimps.org
Subject: Re: FW/BIOS Bug category for oops.kernel.org
On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 10:34:43PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 10:26:10PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Hi oops.kernel.org folks,
> >
> > I'm wanting to collect information on FW/BIOS bugs, and I figured that
> > we could use the oops.kernel.org infrastructure to do this.
> >
> > Now, I'd prefer to not use the regular BUG/WARN because it might confuse
> > users and the stacktrace is entirely pointless -- we know were/why we
> > generate the msgs.
> >
> > Is everything between:
> >
> > pr_warn("------------[ cut here ]------------\n");
> > and:
> > pr_warn("---[ end trace %016llx ]---\n", (unsigned long long)oops_id);
> >
> > sucked in automagically, or do we need more magic?
>
> Btw, we have FW_{BUG,WARN,INFO} macros for exactly firmware issues.
They're more like printk prefixes, while we can continue to use them
inside the body, prefixing the actual msg, I think we need more.
Just using those will not get the data out of the machine, not have it
associated with hardware strings.
I want to know how often various FW fails still happen out there and I
want to have a list of hardware to avoid buying ;-)
--
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