From: "Satyam Sharma" <satyam.sharma@gmail.com>
To: Chris Snook <csnook@redhat.com>
Cc: "clameter@sgi.com" <clameter@sgi.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
akpm@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/4] CONFIG_STABLE: Define it
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2007 16:57:33 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a781481a0707200427y7a29257fpfa5978c391eb3534@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <46A097FE.3000701@redhat.com>
On 7/20/07, Chris Snook <csnook@redhat.com> wrote:
> Satyam Sharma wrote:
> > [ Just cleaning up my inbox, and stumbled across this thread ... ]
> >
> >
> > On 5/31/07, clameter@sgi.com <clameter@sgi.com> wrote:
> >> Introduce CONFIG_STABLE to control checks only useful for development.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>
> >> [...]
> >> menu "General setup"
> >>
> >> +config STABLE
> >> + bool "Stable kernel"
> >> + help
> >> + If the kernel is configured to be a stable kernel then various
> >> + checks that are only of interest to kernel development will be
> >> + omitted.
> >> +
> >
> >
> > "A programmer who uses assertions during testing and turns them off
> > during production is like a sailor who wears a life vest while drilling
> > on shore and takes it off at sea."
> > - Tony Hoare
> >
> >
> > Probably you meant to turn off debug _output_ (and not _checks_)
> > with this config option? But we already have CONFIG_FOO_DEBUG_BAR
> > for those situations ...
>
> There are plenty of validation and debugging features in the kernel that go WAY
> beyond mere assertions, often imposing significant overhead (particularly when
> you scale up) or creating interfaces you'd never use unless you were doing
> kernel development work. You really do want these features completely removed
> from production kernels.
As for entire such "development/debugging-related features", most (all, really)
should anyway have their own config options.
> The point of this is not to remove one-line WARN_ON and BUG_ON checks (though we
> might remove a few from fast paths), but rather to disable big chunks of
> debugging code that don't implement anything visible to a production workload.
Oh yes, but it's still not clear to me why or how a kernel-wide "CONFIG_STABLE"
or "CONFIG_RELEASE" would help ... what's wrong with finer granularity
"CONFIG_xxx_DEBUG_xxx" kind of knobs?
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-07-20 11:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-05-31 0:20 [RFC 0/4] CONFIG_STABLE to switch off development checks clameter
2007-05-31 0:20 ` [RFC 1/4] CONFIG_STABLE: Define it clameter
2007-05-31 0:35 ` young dave
2007-05-31 0:49 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-06-01 18:08 ` Dave Jones
2007-06-01 18:25 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-05-31 8:54 ` Stefan Richter
2007-05-31 9:03 ` David Miller, Stefan Richter
2007-05-31 9:03 ` Stefan Richter
2007-05-31 21:11 ` Andrew Morton
2007-05-31 21:14 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-05-31 21:30 ` Sam Ravnborg
2007-06-01 18:02 ` Dave Jones
2007-06-01 20:22 ` Sam Ravnborg
2007-06-01 20:30 ` Dave Jones
2007-06-01 20:55 ` Sam Ravnborg
2007-06-01 20:25 ` Sam Ravnborg
2007-07-20 10:41 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-07-20 11:09 ` Chris Snook
2007-07-20 11:27 ` Satyam Sharma [this message]
2007-07-20 11:34 ` Chris Snook
2007-07-20 11:40 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-07-20 11:50 ` Chris Snook
2007-07-20 16:48 ` Stefan Richter
2007-07-20 16:28 ` Stefan Richter
2007-07-20 16:36 ` Stefan Richter
2007-07-20 19:09 ` Chuck Ebbert
2007-05-31 0:20 ` [RFC 2/4] CONFIG_STABLE: Switch off kmalloc(0) tests in slab allocators clameter
2007-05-31 19:51 ` Zach Brown
2007-05-31 22:37 ` Andi Kleen
2007-05-31 0:20 ` [RFC 3/4] CONFIG_STABLE: Switch off SLUB banner clameter
2007-05-31 0:20 ` [RFC 4/4] CONFIG_STABLE: SLUB: Prefer object corruption over failure clameter
2007-06-01 14:55 ` [RFC 0/4] CONFIG_STABLE to switch off development checks Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2007-06-01 18:38 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-06-01 18:58 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2007-06-01 20:59 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-06-01 21:24 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2007-06-02 15:23 ` Dave Kleikamp
2007-06-02 16:28 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2007-06-04 1:03 ` Dave Kleikamp
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=a781481a0707200427y7a29257fpfa5978c391eb3534@mail.gmail.com \
--to=satyam.sharma@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=clameter@sgi.com \
--cc=csnook@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox