From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make WARN_ON/WARN_ON_ONCE no-ops when CONFIG_BUG is off
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2007 17:31:30 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1197700290.6696.52.camel@pasglop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20071214132755.GA18309@gondor.apana.org.au>
On Fri, 2007-12-14 at 21:27 +0800, Herbert Xu wrote:
> Hi:
>
> [PATCH] Make WARN_ON/WARN_ON_ONCE no-ops when CONFIG_BUG is off
>
> The description of CONFIG_BUG clearly states that both BUG and
> WARN_ON may be skipped. However, our actual implementation still
> checks the condition on WARN_ON if it's used as part of an if
> statement or such.
>
> This patch makes it return 0 after evaluating the expression
> if CONFIG_BUG is disabled. This is consistent with the spirit
> of the CONFIG_BUG option.
>
> The same change is made to WARN_ON_ONCE.
>
> Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
That's something I've actually never quite liked... the fact that we
evaluate the expression anyway. I'm pretty happy with -not- evaluating
the expression when CONFIG_BUG is on most of the time since whatever is
in there is purely here for the sake of the BUG/WARN test.
I understand why some people may want it the other way around, but I
personally find it a very bad idea in the first place to write a normal
statement part of the program as
BUG_ON(do_something());
It's way clearer to me I believe to write:
rc = do_something();
BUG_ON(rc);
And thus, when I write:
BUG_ON(do_sanity_check());
I'm actually execting the function call to disappear when CONFIG_BUG
is turned off...
Cheers,
Ben.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-12-15 6:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-12-14 13:27 [PATCH] Make WARN_ON/WARN_ON_ONCE no-ops when CONFIG_BUG is off Herbert Xu
2007-12-14 18:02 ` Matt Mackall
2007-12-15 4:16 ` Herbert Xu
2007-12-15 5:52 ` Matt Mackall
2007-12-15 6:04 ` Herbert Xu
2007-12-15 6:12 ` Matt Mackall
2007-12-15 6:31 ` Herbert Xu
2007-12-15 6:52 ` Herbert Xu
2007-12-15 17:54 ` Matt Mackall
2007-12-15 6:45 ` Dave Jones
2007-12-15 6:22 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-12-15 6:31 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt [this message]
2007-12-15 6:34 ` Herbert Xu
2007-12-15 18:12 ` Matt Mackall
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=1197700290.6696.52.camel@pasglop \
--to=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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