Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Sun, 06 Jan 2008 12:44:56 +0100 | | From | Richard Knutsson <> | | Subject | Re: [patch 1/5] Introduce __WARN() | |
Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> From: Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>>> Introduce __WARN() in the generic case, so the generic WARN_ON()
> can use arch-specific code for when the condition is true.
>> Signed-off-by: Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>
> Cc: <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> ---
>
> include/asm-generic/bug.h | 17 +++++++++++------
> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> Index: linux-2.6.24-rc6/include/asm-generic/bug.h
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.24-rc6.orig/include/asm-generic/bug.h
> +++ linux-2.6.24-rc6/include/asm-generic/bug.h
> @@ -31,14 +31,19 @@ struct bug_entry {
> #define BUG_ON(condition) do { if (unlikely(condition)) BUG(); } while(0)
> #endif
>
> -#ifndef HAVE_ARCH_WARN_ON
> +#ifndef __WARN
> +#define __WARN() do { \
> + printk("WARNING: at %s:%d %s()\n", __FILE__, \
> + __LINE__, __FUNCTION__); \
> + dump_stack(); \
> +} while (0)
> +#endif
> +
> +#ifndef WARN_ON
> #define WARN_ON(condition) ({ \
> int __ret_warn_on = !!(condition); \
>
What about using a boolean for __ret_warn_on, which then let us remove
the '!!'?
(btw, wouldn't 'var != 0' actually be the proper semantic instead of
playing with '!'s?)
> - if (unlikely(__ret_warn_on)) { \> - printk("WARNING: at %s:%d %s()\n", __FILE__, \
> - __LINE__, __FUNCTION__); \> - dump_stack(); \> - } \> + if (unlikely(__ret_warn_on)) \> + __WARN(); \> unlikely(__ret_warn_on); \
> })
> #endif
>
>
|  |