From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] drm/i915: WARN_ON failed
 map_and_fenceable
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2013 10:58:01 +0200
Message-ID: <20130810085801.GG31670@phenom.ffwll.local>
References: <1376111536-12461-1-git-send-email-benjamin.widawsky@intel.com>
	<20130810084348.GC3561@cantiga.alporthouse.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org>
Received: from mail-ea0-f182.google.com (mail-ea0-f182.google.com
	[209.85.215.182])
	by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBFF5E647F
	for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>;
	Sat, 10 Aug 2013 01:57:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ea0-f182.google.com with SMTP id o10so2484164eaj.13
	for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>;
	Sat, 10 Aug 2013 01:57:54 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20130810084348.GC3561@cantiga.alporthouse.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/options/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx>
List-Post: <mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
List-Help: <mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org
Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org
To: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>, Ben Widawsky <benjamin.widawsky@intel.com>, Intel GFX <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>, Ben Widawsky <ben@bwidawsk.net>
List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org

On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 09:43:48AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 09, 2013 at 10:12:12PM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> > I just noticed in our code we don't really check the assertion, and
> > given some of the code I am changing in this area, I feel a WARN is very
> > nice to have.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Ben Widawsky <ben@bwidawsk.net>
> 
> This is BUG() class. A WARN by itself here isn't going to prevent
> calamity, so cleanup and let userspace die gracefully. The alternative
> is random hw borkage (hopefully triggering an OOPS before it gets too
> far).

I think WARN is ok, there should be enough time for it to hit the logs
before the evenutal machine death. Generally if a WARN requires us to add
more cleanup code it's imo not worth it.
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch