From: Michael Ellerman <michael@ellerman.id.au>
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andi Kleen <ak@muc.de>,
Hugh Dickens <hugh@veritas.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/4] Generic BUG handling.
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2006 18:49:14 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1159519754.15896.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <451CDC31.6060407@goop.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1611 bytes --]
On Fri, 2006-09-29 at 01:41 -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> Michael Ellerman wrote:
> >> + printk(KERN_EMERG "------------[ cut here ]------------\n");
> >>
> >
> > I'm not sure I'm big on the cut here marker.
> >
>
> x86 has it. I figured its more important to not change x86 output than
> powerpc.
Yeah, you don't want to go messing up legacy architectures.
> >> i386 implements CONFIG_DEBUG_BUGVERBOSE, but x86-64 and powerpc do
> >> not. This should probably be made more consistent.
> >>
> >
> > It looks like if you do this you _might_ be able to share struct
> > bug_entry, or at least have consistent members for each arch. Which
> > would eliminate some of the inlines you have for accessing the bug
> > struct.
> >
> Yeah, its a bit of a toss-up. powerpc wants to hide the warn flag
> somewhere, which either means having a different structure, or using the
> fields differently. CONFIG_DEBUG_BUGVERBOSE supporters (ie, i386) want
> to make the structure completely empty in the !DEBUG_BUGVERBOSE case
> (which doesn't currently happen).
> > It needed a bit of work to get going on powerpc:
> >
>
> Thanks. I'll try to fold all this together into a new patch when things
> settle down.
Yeah ok there's a few competing concerns there, it's a good start
though.
cheers
--
Michael Ellerman
OzLabs, IBM Australia Development Lab
wwweb: http://michael.ellerman.id.au
phone: +61 2 6212 1183 (tie line 70 21183)
We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors,
we borrow it from our children. - S.M.A.R.T Person
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-09-29 8:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20060928225444.439520197@goop.org>
[not found] ` <20060928225452.229936605@goop.org>
2006-09-28 23:32 ` [PATCH RFC 1/4] Generic BUG handling Andrew Morton
2006-09-28 23:43 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2006-09-29 0:07 ` Andrew Morton
2006-09-29 5:07 ` Michael Ellerman
2006-09-29 8:41 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2006-09-29 8:49 ` Michael Ellerman [this message]
2006-09-29 8:52 ` Andrew Morton
2006-09-29 19:44 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2006-09-29 19:54 ` Andrew Morton
2006-09-29 8:57 ` Andi Kleen
2006-09-29 9:10 ` Andrew Morton
2006-09-29 9:13 ` Andi Kleen
2006-09-29 9:18 ` Andrew Morton
2006-09-29 9:16 ` Andrew Morton
2006-09-29 9:33 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2006-09-29 9:36 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1159519754.15896.2.camel@localhost.localdomain \
--to=michael@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=ak@muc.de \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=hugh@veritas.com \
--cc=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.