On Fri, 2007-12-14 at 21:27 +0800, Herbert Xu wrote:
> Hi:
>
> [PATCH] Make WARN_ON/WARN_ON_ONCE no-ops when CONFIG_BUG is off
>
> The description of CONFIG_BUG clearly states that both BUG and
> WARN_ON may be skipped. However, our actual implementation still
> checks the condition on WARN_ON if it's used as part of an if
> statement or such.
>
> This patch makes it return 0 after evaluating the expression
> if CONFIG_BUG is disabled. This is consistent with the spirit
> of the CONFIG_BUG option.
>
> The same change is made to WARN_ON_ONCE.
>
> Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <[email protected]>
That's something I've actually never quite liked... the fact that we
evaluate the expression anyway. I'm pretty happy with -not- evaluating
the expression when CONFIG_BUG is on most of the time since whatever is
in there is purely here for the sake of the BUG/WARN test.
I understand why some people may want it the other way around, but I
personally find it a very bad idea in the first place to write a normal
statement part of the program as
BUG_ON(do_something());
It's way clearer to me I believe to write:
rc = do_something();
BUG_ON(rc);
And thus, when I write:
BUG_ON(do_sanity_check());
I'm actually execting the function call to disappear when CONFIG_BUG
is turned off...
Cheers,
Ben.
--
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]
