lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Oct]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 05/17] fs: icache lock i_count
On Fri, 1 Oct 2010 02:16:02 -0400 Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 11:04:16PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > No, we've run into problems *frequently*. A common case is where we
> > convert a mutex to a spinlock or vice versa. If you don't rename the
> > lock, the code still compiles (with warnings) and crashes horridly at
> > runtime.
>
> Sorry, if you run code with that obvious warnings you beg for trouble.
> If you really believe your advanced users arw too stupid to read
> compiler warnings enforcing -Werror is for sure better than obsfucating
> the code.

Well, it has happened, fairly regularly. A common scenario is where
someone has done a conversion in one tree and someone else has touched
overlapping code in another tree and when the two meet in linux-next,
splat. Renaming the field simply eliminates this.

Of course, the warnings don't get noticed because of the enormous
warning storm which a kernel build produces (generally much worse on
non-x86, btw).

Another reason for remaining a field is when we desire that it
henceforth be accessed via accessor functions - renaming it will
reliably break any unconverted code.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-10-03 23:51    [W:0.117 / U:0.628 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site