From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S935480AbYEBSth (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 May 2008 14:49:37 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1762285AbYEBSt3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 May 2008 14:49:29 -0400 Received: from palinux.external.hp.com ([192.25.206.14]:37992 "EHLO mail.parisc-linux.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756253AbYEBSt3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 May 2008 14:49:29 -0400 Date: Fri, 2 May 2008 12:49:22 -0600 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Arjan van de Ven Cc: Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dave Jones Subject: Re: [PATCH] Extend list debugging to cover hlists Message-ID: <20080502184922.GM14976@parisc-linux.org> References: <20080502182745.GL14976@parisc-linux.org> <20080501133209.2c04dad0@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080501133209.2c04dad0@infradead.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, May 01, 2008 at 01:32:09PM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > I like the concept of the patch; however... > BUG() is a tad on the rude side... how about WARN_ON(1) ? I'm just copying the conventions of the code above. If those should be WARN_ON(1) then that should be a followup patch. -- Intel are signing my paycheques ... these opinions are still mine "Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such a retrograde step."