Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 23:32:47 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Darren Hart <dvhltc@us.ibm.com>
Cc: lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
       Nick Piggin <piggin@cyberone.com.au>
Subject: Re: scheduler BUGON lifespan
Message-ID: <20041129223247.GA27705@elte.hu>
References: <1101762694.29380.23.camel@farah.beaverton.ibm.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1101762694.29380.23.camel@farah.beaverton.ibm.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1046
Lines: 22


* Darren Hart <dvhltc@us.ibm.com> wrote:

> I submitted a patch to active_load_balance() that was accepted into mm
> and then mainline.  The patch included a fix to prevent the system
> entering what should have been an impossible state.  The previous code
> tested for it and then continued, rather than crashing or complaining.
> My patch added a BUGON(impossible state) just in case by some fluke it
> still happened.  How long should this BUGON remain in the kernel?  A
> month, a year?  Is there an accepted duration for such safety nets?

it's pretty random how long it survives. Sometimes i remove one after
never having seen it for months/years and grepping lkml and googling
around for the file & line. The BUG_ON()s are pretty cheap, as they
often check what is being fetched anyway.

	Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/