On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 12:39 PM, Pawel Jakub Dawidek <p...@freebsd.org> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 04:39:55PM +0000, Attilio Rao wrote: >> On 11/15/12, Adrian Chadd <adr...@freebsd.org> wrote: >> > On 15 November 2012 05:27, Giovanni Trematerra >> > <giovanni.tremate...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> >> I really do think that is a very bad idea. >> >> When a locking assertion fails you have just to stop your mind and >> >> think what's wrong, >> >> no way to postpone on this. >> > >> > Not all witness panics are actually fatal. For a developer who is >> > sufficiently cluey in their area, they are quite likely able to just >> > stare at the code paths for a while to figure out why the >> > incorrectness occured. >> >> The problem is that such mechanism can be abused, just like the >> BLESSING one and that's why this is disabled by default. > > WITNESS is a development tool. We don't ship production kernels with > WITNESS even compiled in. What is more efficient use of developer time: > going through full reboot cycle every time or reading the warning from > console, unloading a module, fixing the bug and loading it again? > > And if this option is turned off by default what is the problem?
Yes, so, why do you write here? Go ahead and fix BLESSED, make it the default, etc. I have enough of your (not referred to you particulary but to the people which contributed to this and other thread) to not be able to respect others opinion. As I said I cannot forbid you guys from doing anything, just go ahead, write the code and commit it, albeit completely bypassing other people's opinion. Attilio -- Peace can only be achieved by understanding - A. Einstein _______________________________________________ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
