Re: [PATCH 5/8] rfkill: add WARN_ON and BUG_ON paranoia

[Ivo van Doorn <ivdoorn@gmail.com>]

On Sunday 03 August 2008, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-08-03 at 10:07 +0200, Ivo van Doorn wrote:
> 
> > > diff --git a/net/rfkill/rfkill.c b/net/rfkill/rfkill.c
> > > index ea872e5..d5f95cb 100644
> > > --- a/net/rfkill/rfkill.c
> > > +++ b/net/rfkill/rfkill.c
> > > @@ -76,6 +76,7 @@ static BLOCKING_NOTIFIER_HEAD(rfkill_notifier_list);
> > >   */
> > >  int register_rfkill_notifier(struct notifier_block *nb)
> > >  {
> > > +	BUG_ON(!nb);
> > 
> > Probably better:
> > 
> > 	if (unlikely(!nb) {
> > 		BUG()
> > 		return -EINVAL;
> > 	}
> 
> Heh, not really, in fact, it will most likely not even compile to any
> different code. Did you mean
> 
> if (WARN_ON(!nb))
> 	return -EINVAL;
> 
> maybe?
> 
> BUG() never returns. Same for all the other places you pointed out.

Ah right, that doesn't sound too good. I don't think rfkill should
become a blocker like that. WARN_ON should be sufficient. :)

Ivo