The patch titled
list debugging: use WARN() instead of BUG()
has been added to the -mm tree. Its filename is
list-debugging-use-warn_on-instead-of-bug.patch
Before you just go and hit "reply", please:
a) Consider who else should be cc'ed
b) Prefer to cc a suitable mailing list as well
c) Ideally: find the original patch on the mailing list and do a
reply-to-all to that, adding suitable additional cc's
*** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***
See http://www.zip.com.au/~akpm/linux/patches/stuff/added-to-mm.txt to find
out what to do about this
The current -mm tree may be found at http://userweb.kernel.org/~akpm/mmotm/
------------------------------------------------------
Subject: list debugging: use WARN() instead of BUG()
From: Dave Jones <davej@xxxxxxxxxx>
Arjan noted that the list_head debugging is BUG'ing when it detects
corruption. By causing the box to panic immediately, we're possibly
losing some bug reports. Changing this to a WARN() should mean we at the
least start seeing reports collected at kerneloops.org
Signed-off-by: Dave Jones <davej@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@xxxxxx>
Cc: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
lib/list_debug.c | 36 ++++++++++++++----------------------
1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
diff -puN lib/list_debug.c~list-debugging-use-warn_on-instead-of-bug lib/list_debug.c
--- a/lib/list_debug.c~list-debugging-use-warn_on-instead-of-bug
+++ a/lib/list_debug.c
@@ -20,18 +20,14 @@ void __list_add(struct list_head *new,
struct list_head *prev,
struct list_head *next)
{
- if (unlikely(next->prev != prev)) {
- printk(KERN_ERR "list_add corruption. next->prev should be "
- "prev (%p), but was %p. (next=%p).\n",
- prev, next->prev, next);
- BUG();
- }
- if (unlikely(prev->next != next)) {
- printk(KERN_ERR "list_add corruption. prev->next should be "
- "next (%p), but was %p. (prev=%p).\n",
- next, prev->next, prev);
- BUG();
- }
+ WARN(next->prev != prev,
+ "list_add corruption. next->prev should be "
+ "prev (%p), but was %p. (next=%p).\n",
+ prev, next->prev, next);
+ WARN(prev->next != next,
+ "list_add corruption. prev->next should be "
+ "next (%p), but was %p. (prev=%p).\n",
+ next, prev->next, prev);
next->prev = new;
new->next = next;
new->prev = prev;
@@ -47,16 +43,12 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(__list_add);
*/
void list_del(struct list_head *entry)
{
- if (unlikely(entry->prev->next != entry)) {
- printk(KERN_ERR "list_del corruption. prev->next should be %p, "
- "but was %p\n", entry, entry->prev->next);
- BUG();
- }
- if (unlikely(entry->next->prev != entry)) {
- printk(KERN_ERR "list_del corruption. next->prev should be %p, "
- "but was %p\n", entry, entry->next->prev);
- BUG();
- }
+ WARN(entry->prev->next != entry,
+ "list_del corruption. prev->next should be %p, "
+ "but was %p\n", entry, entry->prev->next);
+ WARN(entry->next->prev != entry,
+ "list_del corruption. next->prev should be %p, "
+ "but was %p\n", entry, entry->next->prev);
__list_del(entry->prev, entry->next);
entry->next = LIST_POISON1;
entry->prev = LIST_POISON2;
_
Patches currently in -mm which might be from davej@xxxxxxxxxx are
linux-next.patch
list-debugging-use-warn_on-instead-of-bug.patch
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe mm-commits" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
