Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 31 Jul 1999 03:14:36 -0800 | From | Kent Overstreet <> | Subject | Re: Useful KERNEL_ASSERT Macro |
| |
Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote: > > On 1999-07-31T01:59:40, > Kent Overstreet <kento@pobox.alaska.net> said: > > > What about implementing this specific to the function? i.e. you usually > > wouldn't turn on all the asserts, just the ones for the function you > > thought had the bug. > > Maximum debug mode is an exceptionally good idea. "Writing Solid Code" calls > this "Fortify your subsystems" and I wholeheartedly agree. > > The ones who you thought had the bug are most likely to be the ones who are > perfectly fine, if we pay any attention to Murphy ;-)
Sure, you want the assertions in more than one file, and I definately agree that you want as many as possible, what I meant was if you're having (for example) a problem with file system corruption, the bug probably isn't going to be in the ethernet driver or the video4linux drivers. And if you're debugging a device driver your're writing, you'll probably know the exact file the problems are in. Sure, there will be times when the bug could be anywhere, but usually you have at least *some* idea where the bug is. Then, if you can't find it at first, maybe *later* you can go in and put it/turn on the assertions for the entire kernel.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |