lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [May]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Make
On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 07:14:58AM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Mon, 19 May 2008 23:24:48 -0400
> Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > printk(KERN_ERR "list_add corruption. next->prev
> > should be " "prev (%p), but was %p. (next=%p).\n",
> > prev, next->prev, next);
> > - BUG();
> > + WARN_ON(1);
> > }
>
>
> now that -mm has a WARN(condition, printk arguments), could we make
> this use it? The advantage (apart from smaller C code) is that it puts
> the printk inside the ---[ cut here ]--- which makes it more likely that
> reporters (and kerneloops.org) get the actual text....

Like this ? (I don't have a -mm handy, so guessed based on mm-commits mail,
patch uncompiled, but should dtrt if I understood your diff correctly)

Dave

diff --git a/lib/list_debug.c b/lib/list_debug.c
index 4350ba9..d8dee53 100644
--- a/lib/list_debug.c
+++ b/lib/list_debug.c
@@ -21,16 +21,14 @@ void __list_add(struct list_head *new,
struct list_head *next)
{
if (unlikely(next->prev != prev)) {
- printk(KERN_ERR "list_add corruption. next->prev should be "
+ WARN(1, "list_add corruption. next->prev should be "
"prev (%p), but was %p. (next=%p).\n",
prev, next->prev, next);
- BUG();
}
if (unlikely(prev->next != next)) {
- printk(KERN_ERR "list_add corruption. prev->next should be "
+ WARN(1, "list_add corruption. prev->next should be "
"next (%p), but was %p. (prev=%p).\n",
next, prev->next, prev);
- BUG();
}
next->prev = new;
new->next = next;
@@ -62,14 +60,12 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(list_add);
void list_del(struct list_head *entry)
{
if (unlikely(entry->prev->next != entry)) {
- printk(KERN_ERR "list_del corruption. prev->next should be %p, "
+ WARN(1, "list_del corruption. prev->next should be %p, "
"but was %p\n", entry, entry->prev->next);
- BUG();
}
if (unlikely(entry->next->prev != entry)) {
- printk(KERN_ERR "list_del corruption. next->prev should be %p, "
+ WARN(1, "list_del corruption. next->prev should be %p, "
"but was %p\n", entry, entry->next->prev);
- BUG();
}
__list_del(entry->prev, entry->next);
entry->next = LIST_POISON1;
--
http://www.codemonkey.org.uk

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-05-20 16:39    [W:0.086 / U:0.304 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site