Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2015 23:24:31 +0900
From: Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com>
To: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Cc: Louis Langholtz <lou_langholtz@me.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: kernel/params.c: 'err' variable "set but not used" and perhaps
 should be?
Message-ID: <20150605142431.GB4444@mtj.duckdns.org>
References: <FFF42EF7-42DB-4D5C-9C86-D8773E20D255@me.com>
 <87vbf628uy.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>
 <7E8FFE0D-B9F7-4816-8ECF-2AA5980F3890@me.com>
 <20150603202237.GI20091@mtj.duckdns.org>
 <87eglsuujn.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>
 <20150604021935.GN20091@mtj.duckdns.org>
 <878ubzuuhe.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>
 <20150604203034.GS20091@mtj.duckdns.org>
 <87oakvt2da.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <87oakvt2da.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 938
Lines: 27

Hello, Rusty.

On Fri, Jun 05, 2015 at 10:09:29AM +0930, Rusty Russell wrote:
> What will a second warning which is never triggered achieve?  A bit of

How do you know that tho?  Somebody may change something in the module
code, kernfs or sysfs and break something in an unexpected way.  We've
always used BUG_ON() in __init functions to annotate things which
shouldn't fail.

> code bloat and confusion, when I really do want to ignore the value.

BUG_ON()s are very light weight, __init code gets dropped once done,
and this is an established way of annotating operations which aren't
expected to fail.

I'm having a hard time understanding the point of this thread.  :(

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/