Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756005AbZJAJXs (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Oct 2009 05:23:48 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754535AbZJAJXr (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Oct 2009 05:23:47 -0400 Received: from mail-bw0-f210.google.com ([209.85.218.210]:39912 "EHLO mail-bw0-f210.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752736AbZJAJXq (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Oct 2009 05:23:46 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:subject:date:user-agent:cc:references:in-reply-to :mime-version:message-id:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=lXFz54RVQFazpE97W36aiwQq81sA/4VJcAC+XVscLLEDE5CMOpXJC8OO696715v1YB NR9+ubzckVc/8iH8PGKxDy13qJ3FO5PpuXV0J4gDOU3D++gfw37ZmrPaArowcwYtOKVZ zJZQit9ySYOSuS8HLxXDpAqW9uL59SAzPKo/4= From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz To: David Miller Subject: Re: kernel BUG at drivers/ide/ide-disk.c:187 (2.6.31) Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 11:25:40 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.12.1 (Linux/2.6.32-rc2-dirty; KDE/4.3.1; i686; ; ) Cc: elendil@planet.nl, manty@manty.net, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org References: <20090930110529.GA3676@dis.manty.net> <200910011026.17510.elendil@planet.nl> <20091001.013030.98262804.davem@davemloft.net> In-Reply-To: <20091001.013030.98262804.davem@davemloft.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <200910011125.40081.bzolnier@gmail.com> Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1138 Lines: 25 On Thursday 01 October 2009 10:30:30 David Miller wrote: > From: Frans Pop > Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 10:26:14 +0200 > > > Question for IDE maintainers: should maybe the old printing of request info > > be reinstated, or can the request flags also be obtained from the BUG > > info? > > Using a BUG for this doesn't make it any easier to track down the > problem. WARN_ON_ONCE() or similar is much more appropriate here. > > BUG() is for situations where the system's state is completely > irrecoverably corrupted, and we cannot continue, and that is not the > case here at all. The problem is that you simply cannot know what is the system state here. Thus when the unknown block layer request is encountered the best thing you can do is to BUG early instead of allowing the situation when some requests are silently dropped and possibly causing the data corruption. -- 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/