From: Alexey Brodkin <Alexey.Brodkin@synopsys.com>
To: Vineet Gupta <Vineet.Gupta1@synopsys.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"stable@vger.kernel.org" <stable@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arc: warn only once if DW2_UNWIND is disabled
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 05:38:59 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1467092276.3231.7.camel@synopsys.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5771FD80.1090906@synopsys.com>
Hi Vineet,
On Tue, 2016-06-28 at 10:00 +0530, Vineet Gupta wrote:
> On Thursday 23 June 2016 01:30 PM, Alexey Brodkin wrote:
> >
> > If CONFIG_ARC_DW2_UNWIND is disabled every time arc_unwind_core()
> > gets called following message gets printed in debug console:
> > ----------------->8---------------
> > CONFIG_ARC_DW2_UNWIND needs to be enabled
> > ----------------->8---------------
> >
> > That message makes sense if user indeed wants to see a backtrace or
> > get nice function call-graphs in perf but what if user disabled
> > unwinder for the purpose? Why pollute his debug console?
> >
> > So instead we'll warn user about possibly missing feature once and
> > let him decide if that was what he or she really wanted.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Alexey Brodkin <abrodkin@synopsys.com>
> > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org [3.18+]
>
> Does this really need to be stable backport ?
I think it makes perfect sense for any kernel version because
it saves debug console from being polluted with messages which
most probably have no point (Ok I disabled unwinder in kernel config,
why then spam me with proposals to enable it)?
-Alexey
prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-06-28 5:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-06-23 8:00 [PATCH] arc: warn only once if DW2_UNWIND is disabled Alexey Brodkin
2016-06-28 4:30 ` Vineet Gupta
2016-06-28 5:38 ` Alexey Brodkin [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=1467092276.3231.7.camel@synopsys.com \
--to=alexey.brodkin@synopsys.com \
--cc=Vineet.Gupta1@synopsys.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).