On Tue, 2014-01-14 at 18:20 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: > FYI, for future patches, start the subject with a capital letter. ie: > x86: Allow to handle errors in text_poke function family > > On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 16:42:13 +0100 > Petr Mladek <pmla...@suse.cz> wrote: > > > The text_poke functions called BUG() in case of error. This was too strict. > > There are situations when the system is still usable even when the patching > > has failed, for example when enabling the dynamic ftrace. > > > > This commit modifies text_poke and text_poke_bp functions to return an error > > code instead of calling BUG(). They used to return the patched address. But > > the address was just copied from the first parameter. It was no extra > > information and it has not been used anywhere yet. > > > > There are some situations where it is hard to recover from an error. Masami > > Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu...@hitachi.com> suggested to create > > text_poke*_or_die() variants for this purpose. > > I don't like the "_or_die()". Although I don't care much about it, I'm > thinking the x86 maintainers might not like it either. > > What about just doing the test in the places that would call "or_die"? > > ret = text_poke*(); > BUG_ON(ret);
Exactly this solution has been used in v5 of this patch set, see https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/12/3/258 Masami suggested to use the "or_die()" because BUG_ON() was used on most locations, see https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/12/6/1107 I personally do not have any strong opinion about it and will do whatever makes x86 maintainers happy :-) Best Regards, Petr -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/