Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 12 Jan 2008 15:41:21 -0800 | From | Arjan van de Ven <> | Subject | Re: Top 10 kernel oopses for the week ending January 12th, 2008 |
| |
Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Sat, Jan 12, 2008 at 03:13:29PM -0800, Arjan van de Ven wrote: >> Adrian Bunk wrote: >>> All the other reports only contain the plain trace. Is there any way to >>> get more information whether the former is a pattern or not, and to >>> get this information somehow displayed on the webpage? >> IF the kernel prints that its tainted or whatever it'll be shown, as well >> as the exact versions etc etc if they are there. >> Sadly none of this information is there prior to 2.6.24-rc4. >> ... > > OK, the problem might actually not be the omission of displaying the > tainted information but the omission of considering any relevant > context. > > Looking deeper: > > Number #2424 is WARN_ON-after-tainted-oops. > > Is your rank 1 just a symptom that the system is in a bad state after > running in what is your rank 8? > > In this case the information when following e.g. #2827 is quite useless > since wherever you got this trace from all related context information > like e.g. whether it's like #2424 just the symptom of a previous Oops is > not displayed.
the tainted flags have a flag for "there was a previous oops", and if that's set, the kerneloops.org website ignores the report. Simple as that.
> In the worst case, an entry might only contain WARN_ON traces without > any information where the traces came from and whether it's worth > looking at them or whether the system always already was in a known-bad > state when they occured?
again as of 2.6.24-rc4 or so, this is just no longer the case. The problem is with older kernels which had a WARN_ON() that didn't print ANY information other than a plain backtrace.
| |