Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Wed, 6 Jan 2021 15:09:30 -0500
From:   Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
To:     Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
        Alex Shi <alex.shi@linux.alibaba.com>,
        Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/mmap: replace if (cond) BUG() with BUG_ON()
Message-ID: <X/YY+mjpq15nmryI@redhat.com>
References: <1607743586-80303-1-git-send-email-alex.shi@linux.alibaba.com>
 <1607743586-80303-2-git-send-email-alex.shi@linux.alibaba.com>
 <e50574aa-87b8-8ddf-2235-ef98e22bcb7d@linux.alibaba.com>
 <alpine.LSU.2.11.2101051919130.1361@eggly.anvils>
 <20210106114620.5c221690f3a9cad7afcc3077@linux-foundation.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20210106114620.5c221690f3a9cad7afcc3077@linux-foundation.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/2.0.4 (2020-12-30)
Precedence: bulk

Hello,

On Wed, Jan 06, 2021 at 11:46:20AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Jan 2021 20:28:27 -0800 (PST) Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com> wrote:
> 
> > Alex, please consider why the authors of these lines (whom you
> > did not Cc) chose to write them without BUG_ON(): it has always
> > been preferred practice to use BUG_ON() on predicates, but not on
> > functionally effective statements (sorry, I've forgotten the proper
> > term: I'd say statements with side-effects, but here they are not
> > just side-effects: they are their main purpose).
> > 
> > We prefer not to hide those away inside BUG macros
> 
> Should we change that?  I find BUG_ON(something_which_shouldnt_fail())
> to be quite natural and readable.
> 
> As are things like the existing
> 
> BUG_ON(mmap_read_trylock(mm));
> BUG_ON(wb_domain_init(&global_wb_domain, GFP_KERNEL));
> 
> etc.
> 
> 
> No strong opinion here, but is current mostly-practice really
> useful?

I'd be surprised if the kernel can boot with BUG_ON() defined as "do
{}while(0)" so I guess it doesn't make any difference.

I've no strong opinion either, but personally my views matches Hugh's
views on this. I certainly tried to stick to that in the past since I
find it cleaner if a bugcheck just "checks" and can be deleted at any
time without sudden breakage.

Said that I also guess we're in the minority.

Thanks,
Andrea