[lkml]   [2007]   [Jul]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: WARN_ON() which sometimes sucks
Al Viro writes:

> Actually, the real problem is different - WTF do we need that typeof
> anyway?
> int ret_warn_on = !!(condition);
> [same as now]
> will work just fine...

It will mean more code on architectures which have a
conditional-trap-on-nonzero instruction, such as powerpc, since the
compiler will generate instructions to evaluate !!x. But I don't see
any reason why ret_warn_on couldn't be a long.

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: 2007-08-01 05:59    [W:0.036 / U:22.280 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site