Re: The policy on initramfs decompression failure

From: H. Peter Anvin
Date: Wed Jan 14 2009 - 12:46:43 EST


Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> By your argument the ton of warnings we emit in various situations are
> wrong too and all should be panic()s. That argument is bogus.
>

Thought about this whole thing some more, and it seems to me as follows:
what we really want, and need, is a "panic-level=X" option, where X will
naturally vary for differnet users. I suspect there are many users
today who would prefer a panic (and reboot) on a KERN_CRIT message, even
at runtime. For finer control, we need a message subsystem tag, but
that is something that would be highly desirable anyway.

As such, the initramfs decompression failure should be a KERN_CRIT or
KERN_ALERT message, and not a panic per se.

-hpa

--
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.

--
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/