linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] cpu/hotplug: handle unbalanced hotplug enable/disable

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 27 Apr 2016 12:17:14 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	Lianwei Wang <lianwei.wang@...il.com>
cc:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, oleg@...hat.com,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpu/hotplug: handle unbalanced hotplug enable/disable

On Mon, 25 Apr 2016, Lianwei Wang wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 1:22 AM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
> >> Anyway, from a product perspective way, if we don't want to restore
> >> the unbalanced counter to 0, then maybe a BUG_ON is more reasonable
> >> than WARN_ON.
> >
> > Not at all. BUG_ON is the last resort if we have no other way to handle an
> > issue.
> Actually to the customer, you do nothing currently at all, and once it
> happened then there is no way for the customer to recover it except do
> a power cycle. A BUG_ON can trigger a power cycle and recover it.

Do you have a single incident where this happened?

Thanks,

	tglx