Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760950AbYCGG6Q (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Mar 2008 01:58:16 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755808AbYCGG6A (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Mar 2008 01:58:00 -0500 Received: from e32.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.150]:48758 "EHLO e32.co.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755400AbYCGG57 (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Mar 2008 01:57:59 -0500 Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 22:57:52 -0800 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: Dave Young Cc: Jike Song , Linux Kernel Subject: Re: 2.6.25-rc4 rcupreempt.h WARNINGs while suspend/resume Message-ID: <20080307065752.GF19183@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reply-To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com References: <20080305165531.GB8728@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20080306022854.GK8728@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20080306162724.GA9309@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20080307041940.GB19183@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2158 Lines: 55 On Fri, Mar 07, 2008 at 12:35:26PM +0800, Dave Young wrote: > On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 12:19 PM, Paul E. McKenney > wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 07, 2008 at 11:07:48AM +0800, Dave Young wrote: > > > On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 12:27 AM, Paul E. McKenney > > > wrote: > > > > On Thu, Mar 06, 2008 at 07:08:55PM +0800, Dave Young wrote: > > > > > > > My syslog became a 2G size big file yestoday due to the warnings. > > > > > How about change the WARN_ON to WARN_ON_ONCE? > > > > > > > > Hello, Dave, > > > > > > > > I might be convinced to make this change for 2.6.26, but the condition > > > > that the WARN_ON() is complaining about is quite serious, so I don't > > > > want to take a chance on it getting lost in the noise in the 2.6.25 > > > > series. > > > > > > > > Seem reasonable? > > > > > > IMHO, WARN_ON_ONCE is enough for my eyes :) > > > > I could believe that, but my experience has been that many others > > need the condition to be obvious... > > > > > > > > Better yet, is there some sort of time-limited WARN_ON that kicks out > > > > a message at most once per second or some such? Enough to definitely > > > > be noticed, but not enough to bring the machine to its knees? > > > > > > Seems there's no such functions/macros, but is is really needed? > > > > If everyone reports errors when they see isolated WARN_ON()s in their > > logfiles, then no. But... > > Ok, I agree with you. > > Maybe something like WARN_ON_HZ(condition) or > WARN_ON_PERIOD(condition, period_value)? Makes sense to me! The other benefit of this sort of thing is that it lets you know whether the problem was a one-off or whether it continued happening -- but without too much log bloat. I was thinking in terms of once every ten seconds, but am not all that hung up on the exact value of the period. Thoughts? Thanx, Paul -- 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/