From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: libata janitor project Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 07:46:22 -0500 Message-ID: <43EC8B1E.8050207@pobox.com> References: <43EC7EFB.5020100@pobox.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail.dvmed.net ([216.237.124.58]:44992 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751252AbWBJMq3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Feb 2006 07:46:29 -0500 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Philippe Seewer Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "linux-ide@vger.kernel.org" Philippe Seewer wrote: > Jeff Garzik pobox.com> writes: (please don't cut CC's, particularly linux-ide) >>Long term, we should work to replace the assert() in libata with >>standard kernel WARN_ON(). >> >>If someone wanted to handle that conversion, that would be useful. Make >>sure to pay attention, the sense of each test must be reversed. >> >> Jeff >> >>- >>To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in >>the body of a message to majordomo vger.kernel.org >>More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >> >> > > > Just so stupid little me understands this: > replace for example: > assert(sg != NULL) > with > WARN_ON(sg == NULL) > > right? Correct. > ...What about WARN_ON being defined bu HAVE_ARCH_BUG_ON and assert by ATA_DEBUG? I would rather just unconditionally use WARN_ON(), and eliminate assert(). Jeff