On 3/11/2021 9:23 AM, John Baldwin wrote: > On 3/10/21 3:57 AM, Mateusz Guzik wrote: ... > I don't know that we've had so many issues that we can't just fix them on > HEAD right now vs having to make this a warning instead of keeping it as > a panic. >
Given this isn't a consistency assertion, a nice temporary mechanism would be to only warn during boot but panic for instances seen after that. Perhaps collecting and spamming the early warnings continually too so they get reported. Then less people are blocked from upgrading or having to deal with boot panics, and may be able to avoid triggering other cases. It's one thing to have INVARIANTS on HEAD and expect everyone to chip in on that, but another to have a prolonged unstable range of commits. just my 2 cents, Bryan
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
