From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix generic WARN_ON message
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 16:55:22 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1161809722.3207.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20061025100405.GB7658@elf.ucw.cz>
On Wed, 2006-10-25 at 12:04 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > * Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org> wrote:
> >
> > > A warning is a warning, not a BUG.
> >
> > > - printk("BUG: warning at %s:%d/%s()\n", __FILE__, \
> > > + printk("WARNING at %s:%d %s()\n", __FILE__, \
> >
> > i'm not really happy about this change.
> >
> > Firstly, most WARN_ON()s are /bugs/, not warnings ... If it's a real
> > warning, a KERN_INFO printk should be done.
> >
> > Secondly, the reason i changed it to the 'BUG: ...' format is that i
> > tried to make it easier for automated tools (and for users) to figure
> > out that a kernel bug happened.
>
> Well... but the message is really bad. It leads to users telling us "I
> hit BUG in kernel"...
But they *did* hit a BUG. It just so happens that the BUG was fixable.
We want this reported because a WARN_ON should *never* be hit unless
there's a bug. If people start getting "WARNING" messages, they will
more likely not be reporting them.
As Ingo already said, if it is just a "warning" then a normal printk
should be used.
-- Steve
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-10-25 20:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-10-18 2:23 [PATCH] Fix generic WARN_ON message Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2006-10-18 5:55 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-10-18 18:32 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2006-10-18 18:40 ` Nick Piggin
2006-10-25 10:04 ` Pavel Machek
2006-10-25 20:55 ` Steven Rostedt [this message]
2006-10-25 21:42 ` Pavel Machek
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=1161809722.3207.3.camel@localhost.localdomain \
--to=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox