Re: making kmalloc BUG() might not be a good idea

[Coywolf Qi Hunt <coywolf@gmail.com>]

On 9/23/05, Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> David S. Miller wrote:
> > From: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
> > Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2005 17:58:00 +1000
> >
>
> > If we know how to make certain classes of bugs non-lethal, we should
> > do so because there will always be bugs. :-)  This change makes
> > previously non-lethal bugs potentially kill the machine.
> >
>
> Oh the BUG is bad, sure. I just thought WARN would be a better _compromise_
> than BUG in that it will achieve the same result without takeing the machine
> down.
>
> I think the CONFIG_DEBUG options are there for some major types of debugging
> that require significant infrastructure or can slow down the kernel quite
> a lot. With that said, I think there is an option somewhere to turn off all
> WARNs and remove strings from all BUGs.
>
> Regarding proliferation of assertions and warnings everywhere - without any
> official standard, I think we're mostly being sensible with them (at least
> in the core code that I look at). A warn in kmalloc for this wouldn't be
> anything radical.
>
> I don't much care for it, but I agree the BUG has to go.
>

Nice to see: + revert-oversized-kmalloc-check.patch added to -mm tree
--
Coywolf Qi Hunt
http://sosdg.org/~coywolf/
-
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/