From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx120.postini.com [74.125.245.120]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E0F326B002C for ; Wed, 7 Mar 2012 16:04:09 -0500 (EST) Received: by iajr24 with SMTP id r24so11951869iaj.14 for ; Wed, 07 Mar 2012 13:04:09 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2012 13:04:07 -0800 (PST) From: David Rientjes Subject: Re: [patch] mm, mempolicy: dummy slab_node return value for bugless kernels In-Reply-To: <4F5742AF.7090409@parallels.com> Message-ID: References: <20120306160833.0e9bf50a.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <4F5742AF.7090409@parallels.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Glauber Costa Cc: Andrew Morton , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , KOSAKI Motohiro , linux-mm@kvack.org On Wed, 7 Mar 2012, Glauber Costa wrote: > > I don't suspect we'll be very popular if we try to remove it, I can see > > how it would be useful when BUG() is used when the problem isn't really > > fatal (to stop something like disk corruption), like the above case isn't. > I guess everyone that is able to track the problem back to an instance of > BUG(), be skilled enough to be sure it is not fatal, and then recompile the > kernel with this option (that I bet many of us didn't even know that existed), > can very well just change it to a WARN_*, (and maybe patch it upstream). > That's the point of the next patch which changes this to a WARN_ON_ONCE(1) because all of the BUG()'s that it changes in mm/mempolicy.c aren't fatal. -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org