Re: [PATCH] ACPI: add standard linux WARN() output to ACPI warnings

[Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>]

On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 22:34:25 -0400 (EDT)
Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> wrote:

> From: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
> 
> Signed-off-by: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
> ---
> > i have hit this warning for the first time in January 2008:
> ...
> > that's why WARN_ON()s are so important - there's no way my
> > automated tools (or even i, when taking a casual look at the logs)
> > could have picked up that new ACPI Exception - if each subsystem
> > has different warnings (which change frequently) then it's sheer
> > impossible to automate the answer to the "does that log show any
> > anomaly" question. 
> 
> Maybe something like this would help?
> (totally untested)
> 
> -Len
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/utilities/utmisc.c
> b/drivers/acpi/utilities/utmisc.c index 1f057b7..d53e82c 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/utilities/utmisc.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/utilities/utmisc.c
> @@ -1028,6 +1028,7 @@ acpi_ut_error(char *module_name, u32
> line_number, char *format, ...) {
>  	va_list args;
>  
> +	warn_on_slowpath(module_name, line_number);
>  	acpi_os_printf("ACPI Error (%s-%04d): ", module_name,
> line_number); 



Please do not use warn_on_slowpath() directly!
Please use WARN_ON() or WARN(). The later has printk semantics so this
could turn into

WARN(1, "ACPI Error (%s-%0d): \n", module_name, line_number);


and kerneloops.org and various other tools will pick up the printk like
arguments as part of the warning message.


-- 
If you want to reach me at my work email, use arjan@linux.intel.com
For development, discussion and tips for power savings, 
visit http://www.lesswatts.org