Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 22:15:51 -0800 From: Kirk McKusick <mckusick@mckusick.com> To: mike@karels.net Cc: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>, Christoph Mallon <christoph.mallon@gmx.de>, Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Proposal: Unify printing the function name in panic messages() Message-ID: <201302120615.r1C6FpP8086860@chez.mckusick.com> In-Reply-To: <201302120601.r1C617Q9006038@mail.karels.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> To: Kirk McKusick <mckusick@mckusick.com> > cc: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>, Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>, > Christoph Mallon <christoph.mallon@gmx.de>, > Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org > From: Mike Karels <mike@karels.net> > Subject: Re: Proposal: Unify printing the function name in panic messages() > Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 00:01:07 -0600 > > I'm not arguing against consistency, nor even agaist the proposal itself > (as modified for a lower-case panic macro). However, I don't think the > lack of consistency is the real problem. "panic: watchdog timeout" tells > me what I need to know, whether or not it includes "watchdog_fire" or the > line number. The only problem that has been pointed out is lack of > uniqueness. That is a simpler problem to handle, and isn't handled by > the current proposal as I understand it. > > Mike Though the default for the current proposal gives just the function name, in its verbose mode it give file, function, and line number. And in its lean and mean mode, just the error string. This replacing the hodge-podge that we have now. My main point is that it is a significant improvement over what we have now. Kirk
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201302120615.r1C6FpP8086860>