On Tue, 20 Mar 2007, Andi Kleen wrote:
>
> No, me and Jan fixed all reported bugs as far as I know.
No you did not. You didn't fix the ones I reported. Which is why it got
removed, and will not get added back until there is another maintainer.
The ones I reported were all about trusting the stack contents implicitly,
and assuming that the unwind info was there and valid. Using things like
"__get_user()" didn't fix it, because if a WARN_ON() happened while we
held the mm semaphore and the unwind info was bogus, it would take a
page-fault and deadlock.
Those kinds of things are not acceptable for debugging output. If I cannot
use WARN_ON() because I hold the MM lock and I'm afraid there might be
kernel corruption, then something is *wrong*!
And I told you guys this. Over *months*. And you ignored me. You told me
everything was fine. Each time, somebody else ended up reporting a hang
where the unwinder was at fault. And since I couldn't trust the
maintainers to fix it, removing the broken feature that only caused more
problems than it fixed was the only option.
And you clearly *still* haven't accepted the fact that the code was buggy.
Does anybody wonder why I wouldn't merge it back?
Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
