From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261903AbTHYJgg (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Aug 2003 05:36:36 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261873AbTHYJgg (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Aug 2003 05:36:36 -0400 Received: from smtp-out1.iol.cz ([194.228.2.86]:11941 "EHLO smtp-out1.iol.cz") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261903AbTHYJfu (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Aug 2003 05:35:50 -0400 Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 11:35:56 +0200 From: Pavel Machek To: paul.devriendt@amd.com Cc: davej@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, aj@suse.de, mark.langsdorf@amd.com, richard.brunner@amd.com Subject: Re: Cpufreq for opteron Message-ID: <20030825093556.GA3020@elf.ucw.cz> References: <99F2150714F93F448942F9A9F112634C080EF00E@txexmtae.amd.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <99F2150714F93F448942F9A9F112634C080EF00E@txexmtae.amd.com> X-Warning: Reading this can be dangerous to your mental health. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.3i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi! > It appears to me that the BUG_ON() macro will take the machine > down ? The BUG_ON() checks in this code (a sample below, but > this applies to all of the driver) are not fatal conditions - > execution can continue if an error is returned. Taking the > machine down to report on a non-fatal condition seems somewhat > rude. It is somewhat rude, but it makes sure that the error gets fixed. [And it also appears safer to me: if we know error already happened we opt to stop the system so nothing bad happens.] Questions: 1) is it possible to do hardware damage from powernow-k8 driver? 2) should some of those checks be fatal? 3) for nonfatal checks, is it possible to use WARN_ON() -- warn and continue? 4) given good hardware and debugged driver, will any of those BUG_ON()s ever trigger? Pavel -- When do you have a heart between your knees? [Johanka's followup: and *two* hearts?]