Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: -mm -> 2.6.13 merge status | From | Pekka Enberg <> | Date | Sat, 25 Jun 2005 19:46:07 +0300 |
| |
Hi,
On Thu, 2005-06-23 at 21:32 +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: > then it's impossible to know which one it is without the identical > source at hand.
In which case, debugging is risky IMO (the source code could have changed a lot).
On Thu, 2005-06-23 at 21:32 +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: > That said, I don't like the reiser name-number style. If you must do > something like this, mark responsibility by using a named identifier > covering the layer in question instead. > > assert("trace_hash-89", is_hashed(foo) != 0);
A human readable message would be nicer. For example, "foo was hashed".
Pekka
- 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/
| |