Comment 6 for bug 346303

On Sun, 15 Nov 2009, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 05:13:53PM -0000, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > Oh yes, I am going to change kernel code because your tool scared your
> > users senseless for a LOG_WARN message. Forget it.
>
> I don't know what you're referring to here. Did someone ask you to change
> kernel code?

Yes. A snide comment promoting a kernel change to get rid of "WARNING" in
the printks in the thinkpad-acpi driver, to avoid triggering the tool,
instead of fixing the tool (and whatever was causing it to be triggered).

Which is, obviously, the exactly wrong way to go about it, and the way it
was delivered pissed me off.

I don't have a web interface handy right now, or I'd tell you the comment
number exactly.

> In my view, the way to fix this is to enable apport or kerneloops to
> differentiate between serious and non-serious events, and only trigger an
> apport problem report for a serious one.
>
> Is there anything about that which you find problematic?

No, I don't think what you propose problematic: that's the correct way to
fix the issue. Obviously KERN_WARN and higher-urgency messages need to be
shown to the user, it is just a matter of using the right language for each
severity level (and also of handling WARN_ON and BUG_ON output blocks).

--
  "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
  them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
  where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
  Henrique Holschuh