lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Dec]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] let WARN_ON() output the condition
Hi,

I am playing with linux kernel but kernel dumps on WARN_ON , when I
commented WARN_ON in my code my kernel starts working but I get two
sideeffects :-

1. During Boot kernel Hangs sometimes in :-
Updating /etc/motd...done.
INIT: Entering runlevel: 3
<<hangs>>

2. Always Hangs in :-
cat /proc/interrupts
after showing interrupts
<<hangs>>

Are these side-effects of commenting WARN_ON.

Sometimes I also gets :-

<1>Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address 00000004
Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address 00000004
<1>pgd = c5810000
pgd = c5810000
<1>[00000004] *pgd=85844031[00000004] *pgd=85844031, *pte=00000000,
*pte=00000000, *ppte=00000000, *ppte=00000000

Internal error: Oops: 17 [#1]
Internal error: Oops: 17 [#1]
Modules linked in:Modules linked in:

CPU: 0
CPU: 0
PC is at dequeue_task+0xc/0x78
PC is at dequeue_task+0xc/0x78
LR is at deactivate_task+0x24/0x30
LR is at deactivate_task+0x24/0x30
pc : [<c0037264>] lr : [<c003759c>] Not tainted
sp : c545ddcc ip : c545dddc fp : c545ddd8
pc : [<c0037264>] lr : [<c003759c>] Not tainted
sp : c545ddcc ip : c545dddc fp : c545ddd8
r10: c68fd340 r9 : c02e04d4 r8 : c028ccf8
r10: c68fd340 r9 : c02e04d4 r8 : c028ccf8
r7 : c028ded8 r6 : c028ccf4 r5 : c545c000 r4 : c68fd340
r7 : c028ded8 r6 : c028ccf4 r5 : c545c000 r4 : c68fd340
r3 : 00000002 r2 : 00000000 r1 : 00000000 r0 : c68fd340
r3 : 00000002 r2 : 00000000 r1 : 00000000 r0 : c68fd340
Flags: NzcvFlags: Nzcv IRQs on FIQs on Mode SVC_32 Segment user
IRQs on FIQs on Mode SVC_32 Segment user
Control: 5317F Table: 85810000 DAC: 00000015
Control: 5317F Table: 85810000 DAC: 00000015
Process X (pid: 1107, stack limit = 0xc545c198)
Process X (pid: 1107, stack limit = 0xc545c198)
Stack: (0xc545ddcc to 0xc545e000)
Stack: (0xc545ddcc to 0xc545e000)

How to get rid of dequeue_task issue.

Thanks

Jaswinder Singh.

On 12/6/06, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
>
> * Horst H. von Brand <vonbrand@inf.utfsm.cl> wrote:
>
> > Why not just:
> >
> > WARN_ON(debug_locks_off())
> >
> > here? Would give a more readable message too, IMHO.
>
> debug_locks_off() has a side-effect, and in general we dont like to put
> stuff with side-effects witin WARN_ON().
>
> Ingo
> -
> 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/
>
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-12-06 15:37    [W:0.047 / U:0.232 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site