[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8d9dd1f35af1463dbeaf03c9d028020b@AcuMS.aculab.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2018 09:51:41 +0000
From: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To: 'Linus Torvalds' <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
CC: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Alexander Popov <alex.popov@...ux.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...nel.org>,
Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Tycho Andersen <tycho@...ho.ws>,
"Mark Rutland" <mark.rutland@....com>,
Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com>,
"Will Deacon" <will.deacon@....com>
Subject: RE: [GIT PULL] gcc-plugin updates for v4.19-rc1
From: Linus Torvalds
> Sent: 15 August 2018 21:19
...
> But if people run things on real machines, then BUG() is absolutely
> the last thing you EVER want to do for "debugging".
I'm not sure you want it on a live system either.
Live systems are where the 'hard' bugs show up.
I've just spent a couple of days pulling my hair out trying to work
out how to debug a customer system that was locking up solid when
running some new (and not completely testable by us) kernel code.
At 4am I suddenly realised that the distribution they are using
might be enabling 'panic_on_oops' by default.
Turning that off showed what was going wrong.
It wouldn't be as bad if Linux implemented 'dump to swap'.
For 'errors' that aren't completely fatal the system could
'fast shutdown' a lot of processes (maybe just refuse to schedule
them) while leaving enough running for fault diagnosis.
I'm not sure how you'd decide what to allow to run though.
David
-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists