From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54620C433DB for ; Fri, 19 Mar 2021 18:21:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CA3261981 for ; Fri, 19 Mar 2021 18:21:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230492AbhCSSVQ (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Mar 2021 14:21:16 -0400 Received: from vps0.lunn.ch ([185.16.172.187]:37600 "EHLO vps0.lunn.ch" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230206AbhCSSUu (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Mar 2021 14:20:50 -0400 Received: from andrew by vps0.lunn.ch with local (Exim 4.94) (envelope-from ) id 1lNJjf-00BvJS-Md; Fri, 19 Mar 2021 19:20:35 +0100 Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2021 19:20:35 +0100 From: Andrew Lunn To: Leon Romanovsky Cc: Alex Elder , davem@davemloft.net, kuba@kernel.org, bjorn.andersson@linaro.org, evgreen@chromium.org, cpratapa@codeaurora.org, elder@kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 3/4] net: ipa: introduce ipa_assert() Message-ID: References: <20210319042923.1584593-1-elder@linaro.org> <20210319042923.1584593-4-elder@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > It will be much better for everyone if you don't obfuscate existing > kernel primitives and don't hide constant vs. dynamic expressions. > > So any random kernel developer will be able to change the code without > investing too much time to understand this custom logic. > > And constant expressions are checked with BUILD_BUG_ON(). > > If you still feel need to provide assertion like this, it should be done > in general code. +1 Andrew