Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756772AbXLOGNT (ORCPT ); Sat, 15 Dec 2007 01:13:19 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751559AbXLOGNJ (ORCPT ); Sat, 15 Dec 2007 01:13:09 -0500 Received: from waste.org ([66.93.16.53]:38308 "EHLO waste.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751517AbXLOGNI (ORCPT ); Sat, 15 Dec 2007 01:13:08 -0500 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2007 00:12:00 -0600 From: Matt Mackall To: Herbert Xu Cc: Andrew Morton , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Dave Jones Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make WARN_ON/WARN_ON_ONCE no-ops when CONFIG_BUG is off Message-ID: <20071215061200.GP19691@waste.org> References: <20071214132755.GA18309@gondor.apana.org.au> <20071214180246.GT17536@waste.org> <20071215041659.GB25324@gondor.apana.org.au> <20071215055218.GM19691@waste.org> <20071215060449.GA26199@gondor.apana.org.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20071215060449.GA26199@gondor.apana.org.au> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1598 Lines: 45 On Sat, Dec 15, 2007 at 02:04:49PM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote: > On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 11:52:18PM -0600, Matt Mackall wrote: > > > > No. The code as written above should reduce to: > > > > if (val == NULL) > > return -EFAULT; > > > > If I hadn't wanted to return -EFAULT in this case, I would have just written: > > > > WARN_ON(val == NULL); > > Well the only reason I introduced > > if (WARN_ON) > > is so that what would otherwise be a BUG_ON condition would have > a chance to get written to disk when invoked from an IRQ handler. > > > I don't want code that was running safely (ie returning -EFAULT) to > > start crashing the system just because I've, say, disabled printk. > > That's creating an obnoxious heisenbug. > > I'm disappointed that it has been used in ways that it shouldn't > have been. > > I suppose we'll have to either introduce a new primitive or just > go back to using BUG_ON. Seems we haven't yet reached concensus on what an appropriate use for BUG_ON is. There's a fairly large camp who think that there are basically no good reasons to outright crash a machine and that WARN_ON should replace BUG_ON everywhere. I tend to agree with this position, except when it comes to handling filesystems, where panic is often (but not always) the right thing to do. -- Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time. -- 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/