Re: -mm -> 2.6.13 merge status

[Jens Axboe <axboe@suse.de>]

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 majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/