Re: [PATCH] Fix WARN_ON / WARN_ON_ONCE regression

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Andrew Morton wrote:
So how's this look?

Looks fine to me. Other than the general question of why WARN_ON* returns a value at all, and if so, does the final unlikely() really do anything.

I worry a bit that someone's hardware might go and prefetch that static
variable even when we didn't ask it to.  Can that happen?

Sure, the CPU has the option, but if it goes around speculatively polluting its caches with unused stuff, it isn't going to perform very well in general. So presumably the CPU won't do it unless it really thinks it will help.

   J
-
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]
  Powered by Linux