On Sun, 2007-12-16 at 21:51 -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 15, 2007 at 04:49:05PM +0100, Stefan Richter wrote:
>
> > Reports about tainted kernels have arguably less value. It would be
> > good to hide such reports until a report of the same oops in an
> > untainted kernel was found.
>
> I disagree with this. It's useful to have a "we've seen this before,
> and every time, it was tainted with xyz module" datapoint, especially
> if no untainted copies of that oops turn up.
+1
In fact, that's even more useful in many cases, if it helps demonstrate
that the oops is associated with a particular buggy binary driver. I can
see a lot of potentially interesting statistics coming from that too.
Jon.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
