From: Jeremy Kerr <jk@ozlabs.org>
To: Jason Wang <wangborong@cdjrlc.com>
Cc: arnd@arndb.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, paulus@samba.org,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] sched: Use BUG_ON
Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2021 09:19:27 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <60a148d7c63510cbf31f3517dcb097c77d4ecd7c.camel@ozlabs.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210701141130.940-1-wangborong@cdjrlc.com>
Hi Jason,
> The BUG_ON macro simplifies the if condition followed by BUG, so that
> we can use BUG_ON instead of if condition followed by BUG.
[...]
> - if (spu_acquire(ctx))
> - BUG(); /* a kernel thread never has signals pending */
> + /* a kernel thread never has signals pending */
> + BUG_ON(spu_acquire(ctx));
I'm not convinced that this is an improvement; you've combined the
acquire and the BUG into a single statement, and now it's no longer
clear what the comment applies to.
If you really wanted to use BUG_ON, something like this would be more
clear:
rc = spu_acquire(ctx);
/* a kernel thread never has signals pending */
BUG_ON(rc);
but we don't have a suitable rc variable handy, so we'd need one of
those declared too. You could avoid that with:
if (spu_acquire(ctx))
BUG_ON(1); /* a kernel thread never has signals pending */
but wait: no need for the constant there, so this would be better:
if (spu_acquire(ctx))
BUG(); /* a kernel thread never has signals pending */
wait, what are we doing again?
To me, this is a bit of shuffling code around, for no real benefit.
Regards,
Jeremy
prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-07-02 1:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-07-01 14:11 [PATCH v2] sched: Use BUG_ON Jason Wang
2021-07-02 1:19 ` Jeremy Kerr [this message]
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=60a148d7c63510cbf31f3517dcb097c77d4ecd7c.camel@ozlabs.org \
--to=jk@ozlabs.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=wangborong@cdjrlc.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).