[lkml]   [2002]   [May]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] BUG() disassembly tweak
    On Sat, May 11, 2002 at 12:51:15AM +0200, Dave Jones wrote:
    > On Fri, May 10, 2002 at 03:10:04PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
    > > If it wants to be changed, I'd actually personally prefer it to be changed
    > > to take an explicit string instead of using the filename/linenr at all.
    > Failing that, resurrecting the k_assert() idea someone proposed
    > (jgarzik?) a few months back.

    Oh? I remember many people having objections against assert.

    Personally I like BUG_ON() as is and it helped me already
    catching a lot of bugs in my own code and removed the need for
    several conditions and cleanup code for situation, that happen only
    with wrong arguments/corruption and are bugs instead of user

    BUG() is usally used, when we need to print much more information
    about the error (like dumping some variables, which have wrong
    values). In these cases a BUG_PRINTK() would be much more
    useful, since most users of BUG() use printk before and only want
    to save cleanup code for "impossible" conditions.

    Or at least have a variant of BUG(), which has only triggers the
    code path aborting, without printing filename/line_no (because
    our own debug statements did this already).


    Ingo Oeser
    Science is what we can tell a computer. Art is everything else. --- D.E.Knuth
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:26    [W:0.022 / U:4.488 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site