On Tue, 30 Aug 2011 17:16:05 +1000 Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
[Sorry about the delay. My build machine is being slow.
If this is alread fixed, sorry about the noise.]
When CONFIG_BUG is not enabled (I see this on x86_64):
fs/jbd2/transaction.c: In function 'jbd2_journal_dirty_metadata':
fs/jbd2/transaction.c:1176: error: implicit declaration of function '__WARN'
asm-generic/bug.h does not provide a version of __WARN() when
CONFIG_BUG is not enabled...
---
~Randy
*** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***
On Wednesday 31 August 2011, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Aug 2011 17:16:05 +1000 Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
>
> [Sorry about the delay. My build machine is being slow.
> If this is alread fixed, sorry about the noise.]
>
>
> When CONFIG_BUG is not enabled (I see this on x86_64):
>
> fs/jbd2/transaction.c: In function 'jbd2_journal_dirty_metadata':
> fs/jbd2/transaction.c:1176: error: implicit declaration of function '__WARN'
>
>
> asm-generic/bug.h does not provide a version of __WARN() when
> CONFIG_BUG is not enabled...
>
Hmm, my feeling is that we shouldn't do that either, and that jbd2 should
be changed. If we want a function that does what __WARN() does today, we
should probably make a conscious decision about what we want it to be called
and not have it start with "__".
Arnd
Hi,
On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 7:43 AM, Arnd Bergmann <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wednesday 31 August 2011, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>> On Tue, 30 Aug 2011 17:16:05 +1000 Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>>
>> > Hi all,
>>
>> [Sorry about the delay. ?My build machine is being slow.
>> If this is alread fixed, sorry about the noise.]
>>
>>
>> When CONFIG_BUG is not enabled (I see this on x86_64):
>>
>> fs/jbd2/transaction.c: In function 'jbd2_journal_dirty_metadata':
>> fs/jbd2/transaction.c:1176: error: implicit declaration of function '__WARN'
>>
>>
>> asm-generic/bug.h does not provide a version of __WARN() when
>> CONFIG_BUG is not enabled...
>>
>
> Hmm, my feeling is that we shouldn't do that either, and that jbd2 should
> be changed. If we want a function that does what __WARN() does today, we
> should probably make a conscious decision about what we want it to be called
> and not have it start with "__".
>
Why is WARN_ON() not used here ?
- Arnaud
> ? ? ? ?Arnd
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at ?http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>