From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
"Ananiev, Leonid I" <leonid.i.ananiev@intel.com>,
tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com, herbert@gondor.apana.org.au,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix WARN_ON / WARN_ON_ONCE regression
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2006 17:39:18 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <452848B6.5060401@goop.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1160267327.2368.12.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Steven Rostedt wrote:
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=114935833125957&w=2
>
> That was different, since we were putting a likely condition in an
> unlikely(). But I still don't see why we would ever want to test
> __warn_once before the condition, since it doesn't save on anything and
> just adds extra work. I don't see the savings.
>
Also, in that thread you cite (__warn_once && (condition)) is flat-out
wrong, because condition may have a side-effect. There are plenty of
places in the code which use BUG_ON or WARN_ON as a general error
checking mechanism which expect the condition to be always evaluated
once; WARN_ON_ONCE should be the same.
Personally I think it is poor style, but there you are.
J
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-10-08 0:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-10-04 16:57 [PATCH] Fix WARN_ON / WARN_ON_ONCE regression Ananiev, Leonid I
2006-10-04 17:28 ` Andrew Morton
2006-10-08 0:28 ` Steven Rostedt
2006-10-08 0:39 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-10-10 21:05 Ananiev, Leonid I
2006-10-10 21:17 ` Steven Rostedt
2006-10-10 21:41 ` Roland Dreier
2006-10-10 22:59 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2006-10-06 4:06 Ananiev, Leonid I
2006-10-04 21:55 Ananiev, Leonid I
2006-10-05 21:37 ` Andrew Morton
2006-10-05 21:43 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2006-10-05 21:52 ` Andrew Morton
2006-10-05 22:02 ` Herbert Xu
2006-10-05 22:40 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2006-10-05 21:51 ` Tim Chen
2006-10-06 16:11 ` Andrew James Wade
2006-10-03 23:04 Tim Chen
2006-10-03 23:19 ` Tim Chen
2006-10-04 0:06 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2006-10-03 23:47 ` Tim Chen
2006-10-04 4:39 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2006-10-04 13:21 ` Tim Chen
2006-10-04 16:30 ` Andrew Morton
2006-10-04 16:22 ` Tim Chen
2006-10-04 17:34 ` Andrew Morton
2006-10-04 20:43 ` Tim Chen
2006-10-10 1:09 ` Tim Chen
2006-10-10 13:04 ` Steven Rostedt
2006-10-10 15:41 ` Tim Chen
2006-10-10 20:03 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2006-10-04 0:07 ` Andrew Morton
2006-10-03 23:42 ` Tim Chen
2006-10-04 0:09 ` Tim Chen
2006-10-04 1:14 ` Andrew Morton
2006-10-04 1:47 ` Nick Piggin
2006-10-04 3:24 ` Andrew James Wade
2006-10-04 3:32 ` Andrew Morton
2006-10-04 16:47 ` Andrew James Wade
2006-10-04 22:06 ` Andrew Morton
2006-10-05 8:13 ` Andrew James Wade
2006-10-05 8:36 ` Andrew Morton
2006-10-05 21:31 ` Andrew James Wade
2006-10-05 21:01 ` Tim Chen
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=452848B6.5060401@goop.org \
--to=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--cc=leonid.i.ananiev@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
/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.