Re: -mm -> 2.6.13 merge status

Jens Axboe
2005-06-27T07:24:11Z

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