Long term, we should work to replace the assert() in libata with
standard kernel WARN_ON().
If someone wanted to handle that conversion, that would be useful. Make
sure to pay attention, the sense of each test must be reversed.
Jeff
Jeff Garzik <jgarzik <at> pobox.com> writes:
>
>
> Long term, we should work to replace the assert() in libata with
> standard kernel WARN_ON().
>
> If someone wanted to handle that conversion, that would be useful. Make
> sure to pay attention, the sense of each test must be reversed.
>
> Jeff
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in
> the body of a message to majordomo <at> vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
>
Just so stupid little me understands this:
replace for example:
assert(sg != NULL)
with
WARN_ON(sg == NULL)
right?
...What about WARN_ON being defined bu HAVE_ARCH_BUG_ON and assert by ATA_DEBUG?
Philippe Seewer wrote:
> Jeff Garzik <jgarzik <at> pobox.com> writes:
(please don't cut CC's, particularly linux-ide)
>>Long term, we should work to replace the assert() in libata with
>>standard kernel WARN_ON().
>>
>>If someone wanted to handle that conversion, that would be useful. Make
>>sure to pay attention, the sense of each test must be reversed.
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>>-
>>To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in
>>the body of a message to majordomo <at> vger.kernel.org
>>More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>
>>
>
>
> Just so stupid little me understands this:
> replace for example:
> assert(sg != NULL)
> with
> WARN_ON(sg == NULL)
>
> right?
Correct.
> ...What about WARN_ON being defined bu HAVE_ARCH_BUG_ON and assert by ATA_DEBUG?
I would rather just unconditionally use WARN_ON(), and eliminate assert().
Jeff