From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:52838 "EHLO terminus.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753161AbXGXRHL (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jul 2007 13:07:11 -0400 Message-ID: <46A630EF.5050403@zytor.com> Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 10:03:43 -0700 From: "H. Peter Anvin" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] getting rid of stupid loop in BUG() References: <20070724153916.GS21668@ftp.linux.org.uk> <46A62F35.2000501@goop.org> In-Reply-To: <46A62F35.2000501@goop.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge Cc: Al Viro , Linus Torvalds , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > Al Viro wrote: >> AFAICS, the patch below should do it for i386; instead of >> using a dummy loop to tell gcc that this sucker never returns, >> we do >> static void __always_inline __noreturn __BUG(const char *file, int line); >> containing the actual asm we want to insert and define BUG() as >> __BUG(__FILE__, __LINE__). It looks safe, but I don't claim enough >> experience with gcc __asm__ potential nastiness, so... >> >> Comments, objections? >> > > Does it work? When I wrote the BUG code I tried this, but gcc kept > warning about "noreturn function returns". I couldn't work out a way to > convince gcc that the asm is the end of the line. > > I'm actually in favour of dropping the loop and the noreturn stuff > altogether. It means that gcc thinks everything is live at the time of > the BUG, and the debugging info at the point of the ud2a is more useful. How much code would that add to the kernel? -hpa