From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from sunset.davemloft.net (74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [74.93.104.97]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDD52B6F11 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 16:55:55 +1000 (EST) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 23:55:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <20100414.235557.123118153.davem@davemloft.net> To: mingo@elte.hu Subject: Re: linux-next: PowerPC WARN_ON_ONCE() after merge of the final tree (tip related) From: David Miller In-Reply-To: <20100415064940.GA9240@elte.hu> References: <20100415161214.04637496.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20100415064940.GA9240@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: sfr@canb.auug.org.au, peterz@infradead.org, fweisbec@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-next@vger.kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com, tglx@linutronix.de, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , 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.