From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261474AbVF0HYL (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Jun 2005 03:24:11 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261704AbVF0HYK (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Jun 2005 03:24:10 -0400 Received: from ns.virtualhost.dk ([195.184.98.160]:64726 "EHLO virtualhost.dk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261474AbVF0HYC (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Jun 2005 03:24:02 -0400 Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2005 09:24:54 +0200 From: Jens Axboe To: Pekka Enberg Cc: Andrew Morton , Jeff Mahoney , penberg@gmail.com, reiser@namesys.com, ak@suse.de, flx@namesys.com, zam@namesys.com, vs@thebsh.namesys.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, reiserfs-list@namesys.com Subject: Re: -mm -> 2.6.13 merge status Message-ID: <20050627072449.GF19550@suse.de> References: <20050620235458.5b437274.akpm@osdl.org.suse.lists.linux.kernel> <42B86027.3090001@namesys.com> <20050621195642.GD14251@wotan.suse.de> <42B8C0FF.2010800@namesys.com> <84144f0205062223226d560e41@mail.gmail.com> <42BB0151.3030904@suse.de> <20050623114318.5ae13514.akpm@osdl.org> <20050623193247.GC6814@suse.de> <1119717967.9392.2.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1119717967.9392.2.camel@localhost> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Jun 25 2005, Pekka Enberg wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, 2005-06-23 at 21:32 +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: > > then it's impossible to know which one it is without the identical > > source at hand. > > In which case, debugging is risky IMO (the source code could have > changed a lot). That's not an argument, there are plenty of cases where knowing which BUG() triggered provides ample clue to at least start thinking about possible issues. > On Thu, 2005-06-23 at 21:32 +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: > > That said, I don't like the reiser name-number style. If you must do > > something like this, mark responsibility by using a named identifier > > covering the layer in question instead. > > > > assert("trace_hash-89", is_hashed(foo) != 0); > > A human readable message would be nicer. For example, "foo was hashed". Indeed. -- Jens Axboe