[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AANLkTikPtCL++c47vPCzqBh_veG+fzZWR2w2xAYDUgw=@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2011 14:20:11 +0800
From: Yong Zhang <yong.zhang0@...il.com>
To: i@...y.li
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] use BUG_ON correctly
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 2:38 PM, Coly Li <i@...y.li> wrote:
> On 2011年01月27日 14:07, Yong Zhang Wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 2:21 PM, Coly Li<i@...y.li> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2011年01月27日 10:02, Yong Zhang Wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 2:39 AM, Coly Li<bosong.ly@...bao.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> BUG_ON() already uses unlikely() inside its definition if possible,
>>>>
>>>> It's true for asm-generic/bug.h.
>>>>
>>>> But for archs which has defined HAVE_ARCH_BUG,
>>>> unlikely() is not always included in it.
>>>>
>>>
>>> IMHO, if this condition happens, it should be a bug of the arch
>>> implementation,
>>
>> So that means we should fix that first :)
>>
>
> Could you please to identify a piece of kernel code which provides an
> example as the condition you mentioned ?
> So I can have a look firstly.
# line filename / context / line
1 35 arch/mips/include/asm/bug.h <<HAVE_ARCH_BUG_ON>>
#define HAVE_ARCH_BUG_ON
2 115 arch/powerpc/include/asm/bug.h <<HAVE_ARCH_BUG_ON>>
#define HAVE_ARCH_BUG_ON
Thanks,
Yong
--
Only stand for myself
--
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