From: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
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 23:42:57 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20061025214257.GA2578@elf.ucw.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1161809722.3207.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>
On Wed 2006-10-25 16:55:22, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> 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.
Fine, then why is the macro called WARN_ON()? That's certainly highly
confusing.
NONFATAL_BUG_ON()?
I hate people reporting BUG (or BUG()) when they hit WARN_ON(), and
current wording certainly makes it easy.
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-10-25 21:43 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
2006-10-25 21:42 ` Pavel Machek [this message]
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=20061025214257.GA2578@elf.ucw.cz \
--to=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
/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