Re: WARN_ON() which sometimes sucks

Al Viro writes:

> Actually, the real problem is different - WTF do we need that typeof
> anyway?
> 	int ret_warn_on = !!(condition);
> 	[same as now]
> will work just fine...

It will mean more code on architectures which have a
conditional-trap-on-nonzero instruction, such as powerpc, since the
compiler will generate instructions to evaluate !!x.  But I don't see
any reason why ret_warn_on couldn't be a long.

Paul.
-
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/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: WARN_ON() which sometimes sucks
    • From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>

• References:
  • WARN_ON() which sometimes sucks
    • From: Alexey Dobriyan <[email protected]>
  • Re: WARN_ON() which sometimes sucks
    • From: Al Viro <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] RT: Add priority-queuing and priority-inheritance to workqueue infrastructure
• Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 34] fs/autofs4/inode.c: kmalloc + memset conversion to kzalloc
• Previous by thread: Re: WARN_ON() which sometimes sucks
• Next by thread: Re: WARN_ON() which sometimes sucks
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[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]