2012/11/2 Josh Cartwright <josh.cartwright@xxxxxx>: > On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 04:12:21PM +0100, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote: >> On 11/02/2012 02:38 PM, Josh Cartwright wrote: >> > On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 10:33:44AM +0100, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote: >> >> On 10/31/2012 07:58 PM, Josh Cartwright wrote: > [...] >> >>> +static void __init zynq_periph_clk_setup(struct device_node *np) >> >>> +{ >> >>> + struct zynq_periph_clk *periph; >> >>> + const char *parent_names[3]; >> >>> + struct clk_init_data init; >> >>> + struct clk *clk; >> >>> + int err; >> >>> + u32 reg; >> >>> + int i; >> >>> + >> >>> + err = of_property_read_u32(np, "reg", ®); >> >>> + WARN_ON(err); >> >> >> >> Shouldn't the function abort if a error happens somewhere? Continuing here >> >> will lead to undefined behavior. Same is probably true for the other WARN_ONs. >> > >> > The way I see it is: the kernel is will be left in a bad state in the >> > case of any failure, regardless of if we bail out or continue. AFAICT, >> > there is no clean way to recover from a failure this early. >> > >> > Given that, it seems simpler (albeit marginally so) just to continue; so >> > that's what I chose to do. I'm not opposed to bailing out, just not >> > convinced it does anything for us. >> > >> The issue with this approach is that, while you get a warning, unexpected >> seemingly unrelated side-effects may happen later on. E.g. if no reg >> property for the clock is specified the reg variable will be uninitialized >> and contain whatever was on the stack before. The clock will be registered >> nonetheless and the boot process continues. Now if the clock is enabled a >> bit in a random register will be modified, which could result in strange and >> abnormal behavior, which can be very hard to track down. > > Okay.....but any reasonable person would start their debugging quest at > the source of the WARN_ON. If someone sees the WARN_ON message but > stupidly chooses to ignore it, they deserves to spend the time trying to > track down abnormal behavior, so I'm still not convinced. I am with Lars. You would be surprised how many people do no read bootlog. It should be handled better. Thanks, Michal -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-serial" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html