[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090219185935.GA21820@elte.hu>
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2009 19:59:35 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Petr Tesarik <ptesarik@...e.cz>
Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: remove unneeded endless loop in BUG()
* Petr Tesarik <ptesarik@...e.cz> wrote:
> Since __builtin_trap() will always generate an illegal
> instruction, we can replace the explicit asm("ud2") with it.
>
> This way gcc will understand that the function never returns,
> plus it won't emit any extra instructions.
>
> Signed-off-by: Petr Tesarik <ptesarik@...e.cz>
> +#define DO_BUG() \
> +do { \
> + __builtin_trap(); \
> + printk("BUG: failure at %s:%d/%s()!\n", __FILE__, __LINE__, __func__); \
> + panic("BUG!"); \
> +} while(0)
> +
> #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_BUGVERBOSE
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
> @@ -14,7 +21,7 @@
>
> #define BUG() \
> do { \
> - asm volatile("1:\tud2\n" \
> + asm volatile("1:\n" \
> ".pushsection __bug_table,\"a\"\n" \
> __BUG_C0 \
> "\t.word %c1, 0\n" \
> @@ -22,15 +29,11 @@ do { \
> ".popsection" \
> : : "i" (__FILE__), "i" (__LINE__), \
> "i" (sizeof(struct bug_entry))); \
> - for (;;) ; \
> + DO_BUG(); \
the problem is that the DO_BUG() will generate the u2d
instruction into a random place where GCC puts it. It certainly
wont be in the place where the __bug_table logic above expects
it.
The result will be cryptic crashes instead of a clean BUG
message assert.
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists