Re: [PATCH RFC 1/4] Generic BUG handling.
From: Michael Ellerman
Date: Fri Sep 29 2006 - 04:49:39 EST
On Fri, 2006-09-29 at 01:41 -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> Michael Ellerman wrote:
> >> + printk(KERN_EMERG "------------[ cut here ]------------\n");
> > I'm not sure I'm big on the cut here marker.
> x86 has it. I figured its more important to not change x86 output than
Yeah, you don't want to go messing up legacy architectures.
> >> i386 implements CONFIG_DEBUG_BUGVERBOSE, but x86-64 and powerpc do
> >> not. This should probably be made more consistent.
> > It looks like if you do this you _might_ be able to share struct
> > bug_entry, or at least have consistent members for each arch. Which
> > would eliminate some of the inlines you have for accessing the bug
> > struct.
> Yeah, its a bit of a toss-up. powerpc wants to hide the warn flag
> somewhere, which either means having a different structure, or using the
> fields differently. CONFIG_DEBUG_BUGVERBOSE supporters (ie, i386) want
> to make the structure completely empty in the !DEBUG_BUGVERBOSE case
> (which doesn't currently happen).
> > It needed a bit of work to get going on powerpc:
> Thanks. I'll try to fold all this together into a new patch when things
> settle down.
Yeah ok there's a few competing concerns there, it's a good start
OzLabs, IBM Australia Development Lab
phone: +61 2 6212 1183 (tie line 70 21183)
We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors,
we borrow it from our children. - S.M.A.R.T Person
Description: This is a digitally signed message part