Re: + proc-dont-lock-task_structs-indefinitely-cpuset-fix-2.patch added to -mm tree

Paul Jackson
2006-03-03T06:34:32Z

Andrew wrote:
> From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
>
> We presently ignore the return values from initcalls. But that can carry
> useful debugging information. So print it out if it's non-zero.
>
> Also make that warning message more friendly by printing the name of the
> initcall function.

I tried this patch on my sicko kernel, and the following
additional line came out, as expected:

initcall at 0xa0000001007cc4c0: topology_init+0x0/0x280(): returned with error code -12

Looks good.

Acked-by: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com>

> > I should stare at the code between this point of initial failure and
> > the point that the house of cards finally collapsed and see if
> > something should have squeaked sooner.
>
> Probably a panic() in your topology_init().

Yup - a panic it should be.

I guess that patch should be sent via my friendly ia64 arch maintainer.

--
I won't rest till it's the best ...
Programmer, Linux Scalability
Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> 1.925.600.0401