From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from pD9562327.dip.t-dialin.net ([217.86.35.39]:48938 "EHLO mail.linux-mips.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262793AbUKXS3y (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Nov 2004 13:29:54 -0500 Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 19:29:49 +0100 From: Ralf Baechle Subject: Re: Unknown traps. Message-ID: <20041124182949.GF21039@linux-mips.org> References: <20041122142921.GB3230@linux-mips.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: To: Martin Schwidefsky Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Nov 24, 2004 at 04:07:32PM +0100, Martin Schwidefsky wrote: > Makes sense, although to panic if the fault happened in user space > is a bit too harsh, isn't it? A do_exit(SIGSEGV) if the fault took place > in user space and a panic if it happened in the kernel is my favorite > at the moment. There are asynchrous exceptions that can be delivered with significant delay. So could have been caused by kernel, peripherals or even a previous processor. Since for an unknown exception we by definition don't know the cause or or state of the system after the exception or how to clear the condition that is causing the exception I still think panic is the right thing to do. > blue skies, Grey skies ... Ralf