On Tue, 20 Mar 2007, Andi Kleen wrote: > > No, me and Jan fixed all reported bugs as far as I know. No you did not. You didn't fix the ones I reported. Which is why it got removed, and will not get added back until there is another maintainer. The ones I reported were all about trusting the stack contents implicitly, and assuming that the unwind info was there and valid. Using things like "__get_user()" didn't fix it, because if a WARN_ON() happened while we held the mm semaphore and the unwind info was bogus, it would take a page-fault and deadlock. Those kinds of things are not acceptable for debugging output. If I cannot use WARN_ON() because I hold the MM lock and I'm afraid there might be kernel corruption, then something is *wrong*! And I told you guys this. Over *months*. And you ignored me. You told me everything was fine. Each time, somebody else ended up reporting a hang where the unwinder was at fault. And since I couldn't trust the maintainers to fix it, removing the broken feature that only caused more problems than it fixed was the only option. And you clearly *still* haven't accepted the fact that the code was buggy. Does anybody wonder why I wouldn't merge it back? Linus _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
