Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 19 Oct 2006 04:40:33 +1000 | From | Nick Piggin <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Fix generic WARN_ON message |
| |
Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > Ingo Molnar wrote: > >> Firstly, most WARN_ON()s are /bugs/, not warnings ... If it's a real >> warning, a KERN_INFO printk should be done. >> > > > It seems to me that either the warnings are really bugs, in which case > they should be using BUG/BUG_ON, or they're not really bugs, in which > case they should be presented differently.
No. A BUG() will terminate the current process which, aside from the loss of userspace data, can tangle up the kernel badly and deadlock or panic it.
If a bug can be fixed up or otherwise will not result in unstable behaviour with continued operation, then it should be a WARN.
> >> 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, are they bugs or not? I think people are more confused by the > "BUG" prefix and stacktrace than helped by it (even an experienced eye > will glance-parse a BUG+stack trace as a serious oops-level problem > rather than a warning).
Definitely a bug. If the condition is not a bug then the code calling WARN is, so it is a bug no matter how you look at it ;)
-- SUSE Labs, Novell Inc. Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |