Re: [PATCH] Convert serial_core oopses to BUG_ON
- From: Karol Kozimor <sziwan@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 23:34:48 +0100
Thus wrote Russell King:
"until" - I think you mean "if anyone ever bothers" so no I don't agree.Calling serial functions to flush buffers, or try to send more data
after the port has been closed or hung up is a bug in the code doing
the calling, not in the serial_core driver.
Make this explicitly obvious by adding BUG_ON()'s.
If we make it
if (!info) {
WARN_ON(1);
return;
}
will that allow people's kernels to limp along until it gets fixed?
Russel, I agree this should be clearly marked and an oops seems okay here,
but we're talking dead systems here (dead as in all interrupts masked type
of dead). Most users won't even be aware an oops occured, let alone be able
to read the messages on the console.
I was just lucky because after the first one I got (#5958, a regular oops)
I tried to nail it down in text mode, with the console loglevel upped a
bit, so I was able to see what the panic (#6131) was all about.
I think we really need those *_ON()s at least in uart_write().
Best regards,
--
Karol 'sziwan' Kozimor
sziwan@xxxxxxxxxxx
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH] Convert serial_core oopses to BUG_ON
- From: Russell King
- Re: [PATCH] Convert serial_core oopses to BUG_ON
- Prev by Date: Re: Building 100 kernels; we suck at dependencies and drown in warnings
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] Revert sky2 to 0.13a
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] Convert serial_core oopses to BUG_ON
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] Convert serial_core oopses to BUG_ON
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
