Messages in this thread | | | From | "Rafael J. Wysocki" <> | Date | Wed, 6 Jul 2022 17:34:09 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH V2 2/3] cpufreq: Panic if policy is active in cpufreq_policy_free() |
| |
On Wed, Jul 6, 2022 at 5:23 PM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote: > > On 06-07-22, 15:49, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > WARN_ON() would be somewhat better, but then I'm not sure if having a > > full call trace in this case is really useful, because we know when > > cpufreq_policy_free() can be called anyway. > > > > Maybe just print a warning message. > > The warning will get printed, yes, but I am sure everyone will end up > ignoring it, once it happens. > > One of the benefits of printing the call-stack is people will take it > seriously and report it, and we won't miss a bug, if one gets in > somehow.
I'd rather not go into discussing things that people may or may not do and why.
My point is that if WARN_ON() gets converted to panic(), they will not see the message at all and if the message gets printed, they will have a chance to see it even in that case. Whether or not they use that chance as desirable is beyond the scope of engineering IMV.
| |