All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: arno@natisbad.org (Arnaud Ebalard)
To: cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
Subject: [Cocci] Warning masked by BUG() when CONFIG_BUG is enabled
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2013 01:36:52 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <8738mvx3rv.fsf@natisbad.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131117002651.GX16735@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> (Russell King's message of "Sun, 17 Nov 2013 00:26:51 +0000")

Hi Russell,

Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> writes:

> On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 11:52:08PM +0100, Arnaud Ebalard wrote:
>> I was kind of curious not to have noticed it during kernel builds for
>> armada 370/xp targets. The reason is the following: on my Armada 370/XP
>> builds, I had CONFIG_BUG=y which makes BUG() call panic() (which never
>> returns).
>
> You're not the first to spot this, and you won't be the last.
>
> Some very experienced kernel hackers have tried to get this fixed and
> failed.  It seems people actually want the CPU to fall through the
> BUG() sites when people disable CONFIG_BUG - which I think is idiotic.
>
> Arnd (and myself) have worked on this problem, and we came up with a
> very nice solution which didn't increase the size of the kernel and
> didn't make things unsafe.  However, it went nowhere.
>
> It's pointless trying to get this fixed - it's just a complete waste of
> time because of politics.  Find something else to attack.  Just ensure
> you always have CONFIG_BUG enabled if you want a system which will
> produce some kind of report when one of these sites gets hit.

Understood. Thanks for the explanation.

Cheers,

a+

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: arno@natisbad.org (Arnaud Ebalard)
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>,
	Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
	Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
	linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, cocci@systeme.lip6.fr,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@lip6.fr>
Subject: Re: Warning masked by BUG() when CONFIG_BUG is enabled
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2013 01:36:52 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <8738mvx3rv.fsf@natisbad.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131117002651.GX16735@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> (Russell King's message of "Sun, 17 Nov 2013 00:26:51 +0000")

Hi Russell,

Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> writes:

> On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 11:52:08PM +0100, Arnaud Ebalard wrote:
>> I was kind of curious not to have noticed it during kernel builds for
>> armada 370/xp targets. The reason is the following: on my Armada 370/XP
>> builds, I had CONFIG_BUG=y which makes BUG() call panic() (which never
>> returns).
>
> You're not the first to spot this, and you won't be the last.
>
> Some very experienced kernel hackers have tried to get this fixed and
> failed.  It seems people actually want the CPU to fall through the
> BUG() sites when people disable CONFIG_BUG - which I think is idiotic.
>
> Arnd (and myself) have worked on this problem, and we came up with a
> very nice solution which didn't increase the size of the kernel and
> didn't make things unsafe.  However, it went nowhere.
>
> It's pointless trying to get this fixed - it's just a complete waste of
> time because of politics.  Find something else to attack.  Just ensure
> you always have CONFIG_BUG enabled if you want a system which will
> produce some kind of report when one of these sites gets hit.

Understood. Thanks for the explanation.

Cheers,

a+

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: arno@natisbad.org (Arnaud Ebalard)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Warning masked by BUG() when CONFIG_BUG is enabled
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2013 01:36:52 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <8738mvx3rv.fsf@natisbad.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131117002651.GX16735@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> (Russell King's message of "Sun, 17 Nov 2013 00:26:51 +0000")

Hi Russell,

Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> writes:

> On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 11:52:08PM +0100, Arnaud Ebalard wrote:
>> I was kind of curious not to have noticed it during kernel builds for
>> armada 370/xp targets. The reason is the following: on my Armada 370/XP
>> builds, I had CONFIG_BUG=y which makes BUG() call panic() (which never
>> returns).
>
> You're not the first to spot this, and you won't be the last.
>
> Some very experienced kernel hackers have tried to get this fixed and
> failed.  It seems people actually want the CPU to fall through the
> BUG() sites when people disable CONFIG_BUG - which I think is idiotic.
>
> Arnd (and myself) have worked on this problem, and we came up with a
> very nice solution which didn't increase the size of the kernel and
> didn't make things unsafe.  However, it went nowhere.
>
> It's pointless trying to get this fixed - it's just a complete waste of
> time because of politics.  Find something else to attack.  Just ensure
> you always have CONFIG_BUG enabled if you want a system which will
> produce some kind of report when one of these sites gets hit.

Understood. Thanks for the explanation.

Cheers,

a+

  reply	other threads:[~2013-11-17  0:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-11-16 22:52 [Cocci] Warning masked by BUG() when CONFIG_BUG is enabled Arnaud Ebalard
2013-11-16 22:52 ` Arnaud Ebalard
2013-11-16 22:52 ` Arnaud Ebalard
2013-11-17  0:26 ` [Cocci] " Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-11-17  0:26   ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-11-17  0:26   ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-11-17  0:36   ` Arnaud Ebalard [this message]
2013-11-17  0:36     ` Arnaud Ebalard
2013-11-17  0:36     ` Arnaud Ebalard
2013-11-17 14:06 ` [Cocci] " Wolfram Sang
2013-11-17 14:06   ` Wolfram Sang
2013-11-17 14:06   ` Wolfram Sang
2013-11-17 14:47   ` Julia Lawall
2013-11-17 14:47     ` Julia Lawall
2013-11-17 14:47     ` Julia Lawall

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=8738mvx3rv.fsf@natisbad.org \
    --to=arno@natisbad.org \
    --cc=cocci@systeme.lip6.fr \
    /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.