On 01/09/2011 12:29 PM, Andy Green wrote: > On 01/09/11 12:09, Somebody in the thread at some point said: > >>> Sounds right. The user is going to google why his log is filling with >>> these warnings if he cares and the problem is bad, and this covers his >>> code as well as distro code (with the small window where the alignment >>> policy is still 0 from running init through actually setting the >>> alignment policy to fix+log if he doesn't know about the kernel >>> parameter). >>> >>> If he doesn't use Fedora initscripts, then he's at the mercy of the >>> kernel default alignment policy of "mangle data silently" but that's not >>> a Fedora problem. >> >> In can, however, see one good argument for warn+signal, and that is that >> abrt already picks up crashes for reporting so no change would be >> required there. Also a core dump would be useful to pin down the errors >> that aren't trivial to reproduce. > > Signal is pretty violent if, for example, once in a blue moon even init > or sshd can blow an alignment fault for some reason. It'd be very > interesting to find it in the logs but less interesting to find your > embedded Fedora device at the bottom of the ocean can't be logged into > any more for no real reason. I understand your point, but we're talking about defaults here, not specialist defices that were deployed by people knowledgeable of what they are doing. Fedora is a development/testing distribution, no a production/stable/enterprise one. Whould there ever be a release of RHEL for ARM, then that should perhaps have alignment=3 as default, and perhaps Fedora should have alignment=5 as default. Gordan _______________________________________________ arm mailing list arm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/arm
