Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2007 12:12:54 -0600
From: Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com>
To: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
       Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
       Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make WARN_ON/WARN_ON_ONCE no-ops when CONFIG_BUG is off
Message-ID: <20071215181254.GU17536@waste.org>
References: <20071214132755.GA18309@gondor.apana.org.au> <1197700290.6696.52.camel@pasglop> <20071215063442.GA26491@gondor.apana.org.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20071215063442.GA26491@gondor.apana.org.au>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 998
Lines: 22

On Sat, Dec 15, 2007 at 02:34:42PM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 15, 2007 at 05:31:30PM +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> >
> > That's something I've actually never quite liked... the fact that we
> > evaluate the expression anyway. I'm pretty happy with -not- evaluating
> > the expression when CONFIG_BUG is on most of the time since whatever is
> > in there is purely here for the sake of the BUG/WARN test.
> 
> Whether we evaluate the expression is a completely different debate.
> I personally agree with you that expressions that have side-effects
> are a stupid idea for either WARN_ON or BUG_ON.

As do I. But we can't really do anything about it short of auditing
them all.

-- 
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/