On 1/17/18 9:05 AM, Christian Borntraeger wrote: > > > On 01/17/2018 04:46 PM, Jens Axboe wrote: >> On 1/17/18 5:34 AM, Ming Lei wrote: >>> We know this WARN_ON is harmless and the stack trace isn't useful too, >>> so convert it to printk(), and avoid to confuse people. >> >> I disagree, it is useful to know the exact path it happened from, >> in case it's a valid warning. It could be an inline run and >> we screwed up the logic, or it could be from a workqueue and >> the reason would be entirely different. > > Then add a dump_stack or whatever, but WARN_ON does have fatal effects > for some setups. If it can happen then WARN_ON is just wrong. dump_stack() is fine - and the intent is for it to never happen, it would be nice to close those holes so we're only catching cases that are due to bad code. -- Jens Axboe
