From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750885AbWI2IlL (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Sep 2006 04:41:11 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750819AbWI2IlK (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Sep 2006 04:41:10 -0400 Received: from gw.goop.org ([64.81.55.164]:56012 "EHLO mail.goop.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161415AbWI2IlJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Sep 2006 04:41:09 -0400 Message-ID: <451CDC31.6060407@goop.org> Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2006 01:41:21 -0700 From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (X11/20060913) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: michael@ellerman.id.au CC: Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andi Kleen , Hugh Dickens , Paul Mackerras Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/4] Generic BUG handling. References: <20060928225444.439520197@goop.org> > <20060928225452.229936605@goop.org>> <1159506427.25820.20.camel@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <1159506427.25820.20.camel@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Michael Ellerman wrote: >> + printk(KERN_EMERG "------------[ cut here ]------------\n"); >> > > I'm not sure I'm big on the cut here marker. > x86 has it. I figured its more important to not change x86 output than powerpc. >> i386 implements CONFIG_DEBUG_BUGVERBOSE, but x86-64 and powerpc do >> not. This should probably be made more consistent. >> > > It looks like if you do this you _might_ be able to share struct > bug_entry, or at least have consistent members for each arch. Which > would eliminate some of the inlines you have for accessing the bug > struct. > Yeah, its a bit of a toss-up. powerpc wants to hide the warn flag somewhere, which either means having a different structure, or using the fields differently. CONFIG_DEBUG_BUGVERBOSE supporters (ie, i386) want to make the structure completely empty in the !DEBUG_BUGVERBOSE case (which doesn't currently happen). > It needed a bit of work to get going on powerpc: > Thanks. I'll try to fold all this together into a new patch when things settle down. J