From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Nov 25 14:05:10 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0E85138; Sun, 25 Nov 2012 14:05:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pawel@dawidek.net) Received: from mail.dawidek.net (garage.dawidek.net [91.121.88.72]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EDC88FC08; Sun, 25 Nov 2012 14:05:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (89-73-195-149.dynamic.chello.pl [89.73.195.149]) by mail.dawidek.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1AEC3C67; Sun, 25 Nov 2012 15:03:21 +0100 (CET) Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2012 15:06:21 +0100 From: Pawel Jakub Dawidek To: Attilio Rao Subject: Re: [RFQ] make witness panic an option Message-ID: <20121125140620.GL1460@garage.freebsd.pl> References: <20121125123920.GI1460@garage.freebsd.pl> <20121125131252.GJ1460@garage.freebsd.pl> <20121125134743.GK1460@garage.freebsd.pl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="7vAdt9JsdkkzRPKN" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-OS: FreeBSD 10.0-CURRENT amd64 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: "freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org" , Adrian Chadd , Giovanni Trematerra , freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2012 14:05:10 -0000 --7vAdt9JsdkkzRPKN Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 01:48:23PM +0000, Attilio Rao wrote: > On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 1:47 PM, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wr= ote: > > On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 01:37:19PM +0000, Attilio Rao wrote: > >> On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Pawel Jakub Dawidek = wrote: > >> > On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 12:42:16PM +0000, Attilio Rao wrote: > >> >> On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 12:39 PM, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote: > >> >> > WITNESS is a development tool. We don't ship production kernels w= ith > >> >> > WITNESS even compiled in. What is more efficient use of developer= time: > >> >> > going through full reboot cycle every time or reading the warning= from > >> >> > console, unloading a module, fixing the bug and loading it again? > >> >> > > >> >> > And if this option is turned off by default what is the problem? > >> >> > >> >> Yes, so, why do you write here? > >> > > >> > I'm trying to understand why do you object. Until now the only conce= rn > >> > you have that I found is that you are afraid of it being abused. I d= on't > >> > see how this can be abused if it is turned off by default. If someone > >> > will commit a change that will turn it on by default, believe me, I'= ll > >> > unleash hell personally. > >> > >> So I don't understand what are you proposing. > >> You are not proposing to switch BLESSING on and you are not proposing > >> to import Adrian's patches in, if I get it correctly. I don't > >> understand then. > > > > I propose to get Adrian's patches in, just leave current behaviour as > > the default. >=20 > So if I tell that I'm afraid this mechanism will be abused (and > believe me, I really wanted to trimm out BLESSING stuff also for the > same reason) and you say "you can't see how" there is not much we can > discuss. This is not what I said. I would see it as abuse if someone will suddenly decided to turn off locking assertions by default in FreeBSD base. If he will turn that off on his private machine be it to speed up his development (a good thing) or to shut up important lock assertion (a bad thing) this is entirely his decision. He can already do that having all the source code, its just more complex. Make tools, not policies. BLESSING is totally different subject. You were afraid that people will start to silence LORs they don't understand by committing blessed pairs to FreeBSD base. And this situation is abuse and I fully agree, but I also still think BLESSING is useful, although I recognize it might be hard to prevent mentioned abuse. In case of Adrian's patch nothing will change in how we enforce locking assertions in FreeBSD base. > You know how I think, there is no need to wait for me to reconsider, > because I don't believe this will happen with arguments like "I don't > think", "I don't agree", etc. I provide valid arguments with I hope proper explanation, you choose not to address them or ignore them and I hope this will change:) --=20 Pawel Jakub Dawidek http://www.wheelsystems.com FreeBSD committer http://www.FreeBSD.org Am I Evil? Yes, I Am! http://tupytaj.pl --7vAdt9JsdkkzRPKN Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAlCyJdwACgkQForvXbEpPzTHCACeMiM0zXHueZ1aJcdEX56NOsXP VskAoLbBLZH742DdygjBFTZYOpxAbHrz =Hya/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --7vAdt9JsdkkzRPKN--