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, 24 Mar 2021 14:21:57 -0300
From:   Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>
To:     Logan Gunthorpe <logang@deltatee.com>
Cc:     Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org,
        Stephen Bates <sbates@raithlin.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
        Christian =?utf-8?B?S8O2bmln?= <christian.koenig@amd.com>,
        Ira Weiny <iweiny@intel.com>,
        John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>,
        Don Dutile <ddutile@redhat.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
        Jakowski Andrzej <andrzej.jakowski@intel.com>,
        Minturn Dave B <dave.b.minturn@intel.com>,
        Jason Ekstrand <jason@jlekstrand.net>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        Xiong Jianxin <jianxin.xiong@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 04/11] PCI/P2PDMA: Introduce
 pci_p2pdma_should_map_bus() and pci_p2pdma_bus_offset()
Message-ID: <20210324172157.GH2710221@ziepe.ca>
References: <20210311233142.7900-1-logang@deltatee.com>
 <20210311233142.7900-5-logang@deltatee.com>
 <20210313013856.GA3402637@iweiny-DESK2.sc.intel.com>
 <7509243d-b605-953b-6941-72876a60d527@deltatee.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <7509243d-b605-953b-6941-72876a60d527@deltatee.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 10:27:08AM -0600, Logan Gunthorpe wrote:

> In this case the WARN_ON is just to guard against misuse of the
> function. It should never happen unless a developer changes the code in
> a way that is incorrect. So I think that's the correct use of WARN_ON.
> Though I might change it to WARN and return, that seems safer.

Right, WARN_ON and return is the right pattern for an assertion that
must never happen:

  if (WARN_ON(foo))
      return -1

Linus wants assertions like this to be able to recover. People runing
the 'panic on warn' mode want the kernel to stop if it detects an
internal malfunction.

Jason