Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] a more efficient BUG() macro | From | Andi Kleen <> | Date | 18 Feb 2001 15:27:01 +0100 |
| |
Keith Owens <kaos@ocs.com.au> writes: > > Would people prefer the C/ASM filename in BUG() messages instead of the > include header? If so I will add it to my todo list for the makefile > rewrite. Of course you can still use __FILE__ and __LINE_ if you > really want to report the error against the include file.
I think include file name makes more sense, otherwise you'll have a hard time to find the actual BUG check. If someone wants more they can decode the oops.
-Andi - 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/
| |