[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090912180527.GA4893@lenovo>
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2009 22:05:27 +0400
From: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>
To: Daniel Walker <dwalker@...o99.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Julia Lawall <julia@...u.dk>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: apic: convert BUG() to BUG_ON()
[Daniel Walker - Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 10:40:20AM -0700]
| This was done using Coccinelle's BUG_ON semantic patch.
|
| Signed-off-by: Daniel Walker <dwalker@...o99.com>
| ---
| arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic.c | 3 +--
| 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
|
| diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic.c b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic.c
| index a34601f..e3d467e 100644
| --- a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic.c
| +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic.c
| @@ -1197,8 +1197,7 @@ void __cpuinit setup_local_APIC(void)
| * Double-check whether this APIC is really registered.
| * This is meaningless in clustered apic mode, so we skip it.
| */
| - if (!apic->apic_id_registered())
| - BUG();
| + BUG_ON(!apic->apic_id_registered());
|
| /*
| * Intel recommends to set DFR, LDR and TPR before enabling
| --
| 1.5.6.3
|
Hi Daniel,
I believe having a changelog like
Use short form of "if() BUG()" sequence
would be better perhaps? Since "Coccinelle's BUG_ON semantic patch"
somehow doesn't describe why it's done.
Don't get me wrong please. It's trivial and seen from patch
itself _why_ it's done though changelog doesn't say the same.
Perhaps I'm too nagging :) Feel free to ignore me.
-- Cyrill
--
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