Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Sun, 3 May 2020 22:36:43 -0400
From:   Rafael Aquini <aquini@redhat.com>
To:     Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw>
Cc:     Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        akpm@linux-foundation.org, iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com,
        rientjes@google.com, penberg@kernel.org, cl@linux.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: slub: add panic_on_error to the debug facilities
Message-ID: <20200504023643.GA18463@t490s>
References: <20200501215441.GE27720@optiplex-lnx>
 <8CD9EA82-8BE1-47B4-AD35-7D300CAD745C@lca.pw>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <8CD9EA82-8BE1-47B4-AD35-7D300CAD745C@lca.pw>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, May 01, 2020 at 07:17:24PM -0400, Qian Cai wrote:
>=20
>=20
> > On May 1, 2020, at 5:54 PM, Rafael Aquini <aquini@redhat.com> wrote:
> >=20
> > It seems like a good idea which also would required "adding things"
> > elsewhere, but doesn't look mutually exclusive with the approach here=
.
>=20
> Also, what=E2=80=99s so special about these bad pages here that deserve=
 a crash dump, but not other TAINT_BAD_PAGE places?
>

In that light, yes they're not as different and we could better leverage
a panic_on_taint mechanism (similar to panic_on_warn).

I'll get that posted soon.

Thanks.
-- Rafael=20