Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2009 09:40:34 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <20091001.094034.161463891.davem@davemloft.net>
To: bzolnier@gmail.com
Cc: elendil@planet.nl, manty@manty.net, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: kernel BUG at drivers/ide/ide-disk.c:187 (2.6.31)
From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
In-Reply-To: <200910011125.40081.bzolnier@gmail.com>
References: <200910011026.17510.elendil@planet.nl>
	<20091001.013030.98262804.davem@davemloft.net>
	<200910011125.40081.bzolnier@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 910
Lines: 21

From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 11:25:40 +0200

> 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.

Yes, but if you BUG() in this kind of location, the chance of getting
the debugging information from the user can be close to zero.  We were
very lucky this time :-)

If we're tossing a request, signal an error to the submitter.

I hear we have infrastructure for that :-)
--
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/