Hi Anton,
On 11/19/05, Phillip Hellewell <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > + BUG();
> > > + err = -EINVAL;
> > > + goto out;
On Sat, 19 Nov 2005, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> > Why do you want to BUG() and then handle the situation?
On Sun, 2005-11-20 at 15:34 +0000, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> Because you can define BUG() to nothing (on embedded builds for example)
> and then you would be screwed if you don't handle the error gracefully.
> You should never assume something does not return, except perhaps a
> panic() although someone might even get rid of that one day...
You have a point but in this case, I don't understand why they don't
just handle it gracefully since they clearly can do so. Also, I was
under the impression that people who disable BUG() are knowingly taking
the risk...
Pekka
-
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]
