From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: linux-next: PowerPC WARN_ON_ONCE() after merge of the final tree (tip related) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 23:55:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20100414.235557.123118153.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20100415161214.04637496.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20100415064940.GA9240@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:54163 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751712Ab0DOGzy (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Apr 2010 02:55:54 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20100415064940.GA9240@elte.hu> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: mingo@elte.hu Cc: sfr@canb.auug.org.au, tglx@linutronix.de, hpa@zytor.com, peterz@infradead.org, linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, fweisbec@gmail.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org From: Ingo Molnar Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 08:49:40 +0200 > Btw., WARN_ON trapping on PowerPC is clearly a PowerPC bug - there's a good > reason we have WARN_ON versus BUG_ON - it should be fixed. I disagree, an implementation should be allowed to use the most efficient implementation possible for both interfaces. I would be using traps for both on sparc64 if that were really feasible on sparc64 (and actually with gcc-4.5's "asm goto" it might actually be now) The WARN and BUG macros, when implemented without traps, have serious implications for overall code size and register pressure.