From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934691AbaEFJlV (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 May 2014 05:41:21 -0400 Received: from b.ns.miles-group.at ([95.130.255.144]:1660 "EHLO radon.swed.at" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S934523AbaEFJlS (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 May 2014 05:41:18 -0400 Message-ID: <5368AE39.1030402@nod.at> Date: Tue, 06 May 2014 11:41:13 +0200 From: Richard Weinberger User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ingo Molnar CC: Paul Gortmaker , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , LKML , Peter Zijlstra , Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] Deprecate BUG/BUG_ON in favour of BUG_AND_HALT/BUG_AND_HALT_ON References: <1398870207-52889-1-git-send-email-paul.gortmaker@windriver.com> <20140506073500.GA26303@gmail.com> <5368987E.7040608@nod.at> <20140506093548.GA27476@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20140506093548.GA27476@gmail.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Am 06.05.2014 11:35, schrieb Ingo Molnar: > > * Richard Weinberger wrote: > >>>> I like the idea but not the name. >>>> What about DIE() and DIE_ON()? >>> >>> CRASH_ON() might be a suggestive name as well, as from the user's >>> point of view we are crashing her system. >> >> I fear such users will think "Why should I crash the kernel?". ;-) > > That's exactly the impression that the naming should create in kernel > developers why try to add CRASH_ON() in the future: only do it as an > absolute last resort. > > WARN_ON() and other non-destructive ways to deal with error conditions > are almost always preferred. Yeah, I was actually referring to the joke where one asks to remove all BUG() and BUG_ON() to make the kernel bug free. Thanks, //richard