On Sun, 2007-12-16 at 21:51 -0500, Dave Jones wrote: > On Sat, Dec 15, 2007 at 04:49:05PM +0100, Stefan Richter wrote: > > > Reports about tainted kernels have arguably less value. It would be > > good to hide such reports until a report of the same oops in an > > untainted kernel was found. > > I disagree with this. It's useful to have a "we've seen this before, > and every time, it was tainted with xyz module" datapoint, especially > if no untainted copies of that oops turn up.
+1 In fact, that's even more useful in many cases, if it helps demonstrate that the oops is associated with a particular buggy binary driver. I can see a lot of potentially interesting statistics coming from that too. Jon. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
