On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 06:24:01PM -0400, George G. Davis wrote: > Hello Russell, > > On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 10:55:40PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux admin > wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 05:37:54PM -0400, George G. Davis wrote: > > > Hello Russell, > > > > > > Thanks for your prompt reply! > > > > > > On Sat, Jul 20, 2019 at 01:30:23PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux admin > > > wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 10:32:55PM -0400, George G. Davis wrote: > > > > > When an unhandled data or prefetch abort occurs, the die() string > > > > > is empty resulting in backtrace messages similar to the following: > > > > > > > > > > Internal error: : 1 [#1] PREEMPT SMP ARM > > > > > > > > > > Replace the null string with the name of the abort handler in order > > > > > to provide more meaningful hints as to the cause of the fault. > > > > > > > > NAK. > > > > > > > > We already print the cause of the abort earlier in the dump, and we've > > > > also added a "cut here" marker to help people include all the necessary > > > > information when reporting a problem. > > > > > > For what it's worth, I often receive crash dumps which lack the pr_alert > > > messages and only include the pr_emerg messages which this change would at > > > least provide extra hints, since the "Internal error" as at EMERG level > > > wereas the initial messages are only at ALERT level. It's subtle but for > > > cases where the end user has set loglevel such that they only see EMERG > > > messages, the change is helpful, to me at least. > > > > > > > It's unfortunate that we have the additional colon in the oops dump, > > > > > > Agreed, it's rather unfortunate that the string is NULL in these cases. > > > > > > > but repeating the information that we've printed on one of the previous > > > > two lines is really not necessary. > > > > > > It depends on the loglevel the user has set. So perhaps it's not such a > > > bad thing to repeat the information? > > > > Or maybe we should arrange for consistent usage of the log levels? > > Unfortunately, some of the users that I work with have very specific limits > and requirements for kernel error message logging which are driven by > performance and/or storage limitations. So it's not always possible to > "arrange > for consistent usage of the log levels" with some users. Meanwhile, these > messages do show up in logs without the pre-able headers, lacking the string > which is already available. It's hardly a big deal to re-use the same string, > especially for the !user_mode(regs) case, where the kernel will oops at > EMERG loglevel, leaving the NULL string as the reason. I can assure you that > I've tried to convince these users to change the loglevel but they have their > reasons for keeping it as they do and I'm unable to convince them otherwise.
Sorry, but I really don't buy this. By your argument, we should get rid of the pre-amble headers because they're "not useful" in your eyes... -- RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/ FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line in suburbia: sync at 12.1Mbps down 622kbps up According to speedtest.net: 11.9Mbps down 500kbps up
