From: Adrian Bunk <bunk@fs.tum.de>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@suse.de>, Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: What policy for BUG_ON()?
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:15:19 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040830201519.GH12134@fs.tum.de> (raw)
Let me try to summarize the different options regarding BUG_ON,
concerning whether the argument to BUG_ON might contain side effects,
and whether it should be allowed in some "do this only if you _really_
know what you are doing" situations to let BUG_ON do nothing.
Options:
1. BUG_ON must not be defined to do nothing
1a. side effects are allowed in the argument of BUG_ON
1b. side effects are not allowed in the argument of BUG_ON
2. BUG_ON is allowed to be defined to do nothing
2a. side effects are allowed in the argument of BUG_ON
2b. side effects are not allowed in the argument of BUG_ON
It would be good if there was a decision which of the four choices
should become documented policy.
<-- snip -->
My personal opinions:
IMHO, 1b doesn't make much sense, since in the case of 1. side effects
are never a problem.
IMHO, 2b is bad since it might cause nasty heisenbugs if BUG_ON does
nothing, and preserving the side effects is easy.
<-- snip -->
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
next reply other threads:[~2004-08-30 20:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-08-30 20:15 Adrian Bunk [this message]
2004-08-30 20:22 ` What policy for BUG_ON()? Arjan van de Ven
2004-08-31 6:28 ` Jens Axboe
2004-08-31 11:14 ` Paulo Marques
2004-08-31 0:25 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-08-31 11:28 ` Adrian Bunk
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-08-31 15:06 Albert Cahalan
2004-08-31 16:52 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-08-31 17:39 ` Albert Cahalan
2004-08-31 21:30 ` Kyle Moffett
2004-08-31 22:16 ` Michael Buesch
2004-08-31 23:32 ` Kyle Moffett
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20040830201519.GH12134@fs.tum.de \
--to=bunk@fs.tum.de \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=axboe@suse.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mpm@selenic.com \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.