Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Tue, 24 Jun 2008 22:34:25 -0400 (EDT) | From | Len Brown <> | Subject | [PATCH] ACPI: add standard linux WARN() output to ACPI warnings |
| |
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); va_start(args, format); @@ -1042,6 +1043,7 @@ acpi_ut_exception(char *module_name, { va_list args; + warn_on_slowpath(module_name, line_number); acpi_os_printf("ACPI Exception (%s-%04d): %s, ", module_name, line_number, acpi_format_exception(status)); @@ -1058,6 +1060,7 @@ acpi_ut_warning(char *module_name, u32 line_number, char *format, ...) { va_list args; + warn_on_slowpath(module_name, line_number); acpi_os_printf("ACPI Warning (%s-%04d): ", module_name, line_number); va_start(args, format);
| |