From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [patch] mm, mempolicy: make mempolicies robust against errors
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2012 15:51:39 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120308155139.19f0ce7e.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F570168.6050008@gmail.com>
On Wed, 07 Mar 2012 01:34:16 -0500
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> And, now BUG() has renreachable() annotation. why don't it work?
> >>
> >>
> >> #define BUG() \
> >> do { \
> >> asm volatile("ud2"); \
> >> unreachable(); \
> >> } while (0)
> >>
> >
> > That's not compiled for CONFIG_BUG=n; such a config fallsback to
> > include/asm-generic/bug.h which just does
> >
> > #define BUG() do {} while (0)
> >
> > because CONFIG_BUG specifically _wants_ to bypass BUG()s and is reasonably
> > protected by CONFIG_EXPERT.
>
> So, I strongly suggest to remove CONFIG_BUG=n. It is neglected very long time and
> much plenty code assume BUG() is not no-op. I don't think we can fix all place.
>
> Just one instruction don't hurt code size nor performance.
Well yes, CONFIG_BUG=n is a crazy thing to do. a) because programmers
universally assume that BUG() doesn't return and b) given that the
kernel KNOWS that it is about to fall off a cliff, why would anyone
want to deprive themselves of information about the forthcoming crash?
So perhaps a good compromise here is to do nothing: let the
CONFIG_BUG=n build spew a pile of warnings, and let the crazy
CONFIG_BUG=n people suffer. That's if any such people exist...
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-03-08 23:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-03-04 21:43 [patch] mm, mempolicy: dummy slab_node return value for bugless kernels David Rientjes
2012-03-06 20:15 ` Rafael Aquini
2012-03-07 0:08 ` Andrew Morton
2012-03-07 0:55 ` Rafael Aquini
2012-03-07 4:25 ` David Rientjes
2012-03-07 4:29 ` [patch] mm, mempolicy: make mempolicies robust against errors David Rientjes
2012-03-07 5:30 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2012-03-07 5:58 ` David Rientjes
2012-03-07 6:34 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2012-03-07 6:56 ` David Rientjes
2012-03-07 16:24 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2012-03-07 21:06 ` David Rientjes
2012-03-08 23:51 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2012-04-26 14:58 ` Christoph Lameter
2012-03-07 11:12 ` [patch] mm, mempolicy: dummy slab_node return value for bugless kernels Glauber Costa
2012-03-07 21:04 ` David Rientjes
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=20120308155139.19f0ce7e.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).