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
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
