> in this case this is really all the version information available ;(
> it seems to be a patched kernel without patched EXTRAVERSION.
> But in the future if I have more specific information (eg it's only 1
> kernel version) I'll mention it in more detail.
> It gets unwieldy if there's 500 reports for an oops of course ;)
Hmm would there be an automatic way to check out the file of the
kernel version and then check if the BUG_ON/WARN_ON is on that line?
Maybe it could be done using git.
>
> >
> >Anyways there are a lot of third party modules who do strange
> >things with c_p_a(), not always legal, so you might look up out for that
> >pattern too. Perhaps report the out of tree modules loaded in the
> >summary too?
>
> I already always will mention if the oops is tainted or not (that I track
> specifically);
I don't necessarily mean tainted, just out of tree modules in general.
There are some GPL modules who do strange things too. Not saying
that these oopses should be all ignored -- they might be legitimate
kernel bugs that they just trigger -- just it should be visible somehow
in the summary in case there is a pattern.
Especially for c_p_a() i'm quite suspicious
because it depends a lot on what the caller did.
One way perhaps would be also to check if there is an out of tree
module inside the backtrace. I suppose you could keep a list
of in tree modules and do this automatically. Of course there could
be false positives too with the standard inexact backtrace.
-Andi
--
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]
