[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87a5gyfqad.fsf@mail.lhotse>
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2024 16:11:54 +1000
From: Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
To: Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...il.com>, cassel@...nel.org
Cc: dlemoal@...nel.org, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, hch@....de,
linux-ppc@...la.no, vidra@...l.mff.cuni.cz
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ata: pata_macio: Use WARN instead of BUG
Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...il.com> writes:
> On 8/20/24 6:04 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>
>> The overflow/underflow conditions in pata_macio_qc_prep() should never
>> happen. But if they do there's no need to kill the system entirely, a
>> WARN and failing the IO request should be sufficient and might allow the
>> system to keep running.
>
> WARN*() can kill your system with panic_on_warn -- Android is particularly
> fond of this kernel parameter but I guess it's not your case... :-)
> Greg KH usually advices against using these macros. :-)
Yeah, but in this case it's replacing BUG with WARN, so I figure it's
clearly an improvement.
Also if someone is running with panic_on_warn then they *want* their
system to panic if anything strange happens, which is the case here.
>> Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
> [...]
>
> Please do CC me on the PATA driver patches! This one circumvented my review
> (again)... :-/
Oops sorry, I think I just grabbed the Cc's from the report. I'll use
get_maintainer.pl in future.
cheers
Powered by blists - more mailing lists