public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Duncan Sands <baldrick@free.fr>
To: Oliver Neukum <oliver@neukum.org>, Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
Cc: linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Frederic Detienne <fd@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [linux-usb-devel] [PATCH 7/9] USB usbfs: destroy submitted urbs only on the disconnected interface
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2004 10:47:48 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200404151047.48239.baldrick@free.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200404151031.19940.oliver@neukum.org>

> > Hi Oliver, I thought you meant that CONFIG_EMBEDDED made WARN_ON go away
> > (or something like that).  If you just mean that it is easy to redefine
> > WARN_ON by hand, then all I can say is: it is also easy to redefine warn
> > by hand!  Anyway, I made you the following patch:
>
> Yes, but I don't trust gcc to optimise away the 'if' if you redefine
> warn().

The "if" cannot be optimized away for the case in point, because it
does something (clears the bit) if it passes the test.  If I used WARN_ON
then it would have to be WARN_ON(1) in the else branch of the if.

> But there is another point. The embedded people deserve a single switch
> to remove assertion checks. The purpose of macros like WARN_ON() is
> easy and _central_ choice of debugging output vs. kernel size.

This is not an argument against using USB's warn, it is an argument for
building warn on top of a centralized macro like WARN_ON or a friend.

All the best,

Duncan.

  reply	other threads:[~2004-04-15  8:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-04-14 10:45 [PATCH 7/9] USB usbfs: destroy submitted urbs only on the disconnected interface Duncan Sands
2004-04-14 13:30 ` [linux-usb-devel] " Oliver Neukum
2004-04-14 13:38   ` Duncan Sands
2004-04-14 15:00   ` Duncan Sands
2004-04-14 15:33     ` Oliver Neukum
2004-04-14 15:39       ` Duncan Sands
2004-04-14 20:39         ` Oliver Neukum
2004-04-15  8:05           ` Duncan Sands
2004-04-15  8:31             ` Oliver Neukum
2004-04-15  8:47               ` Duncan Sands [this message]
2004-04-15  9:08                 ` Oliver Neukum
2004-04-15  9:21                   ` Duncan Sands
2004-04-14 16:48 ` Alan Stern
2004-04-14 17:09   ` Duncan Sands
2004-04-14 17:55     ` Alan Stern
2004-04-17 18:31   ` Duncan Sands
2004-04-17 18:53     ` Duncan Sands
2004-04-17 19:52       ` Alan Stern

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=200404151047.48239.baldrick@free.fr \
    --to=baldrick@free.fr \
    --cc=fd@cisco.com \
    --cc=greg@kroah.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=oliver@neukum.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