[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5ae410c5-6b7a-70d4-128a-255f80cddda3@oracle.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2021 18:31:20 -0400
From: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>
To: Jiapeng Chong <jiapeng.chong@...ux.alibaba.com>
Cc: jgross@...e.com, sstabellini@...nel.org,
xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xen/evtchn: replace if (cond) BUG() with BUG_ON()
On 3/16/21 11:04 PM, Jiapeng Chong wrote:
> Fix the following coccicheck warnings:
>
> ./drivers/xen/evtchn.c:412:2-5: WARNING: Use BUG_ON instead of if
> condition followed by BUG.
>
> Reported-by: Abaci Robot <abaci@...ux.alibaba.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jiapeng Chong <jiapeng.chong@...ux.alibaba.com>
> ---
> drivers/xen/evtchn.c | 3 +--
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/xen/evtchn.c b/drivers/xen/evtchn.c
> index c99415a..b1c59bc 100644
> --- a/drivers/xen/evtchn.c
> +++ b/drivers/xen/evtchn.c
> @@ -408,8 +408,7 @@ static int evtchn_bind_to_user(struct per_user_data *u, evtchn_port_t port)
> err:
> /* bind failed, should close the port now */
> close.port = port;
> - if (HYPERVISOR_event_channel_op(EVTCHNOP_close, &close) != 0)
> - BUG();
> + BUG_ON(HYPERVISOR_event_channel_op(EVTCHNOP_close, &close) != 0);
Is it actually worth doing a BUG() here at all? Seems to me WARN_ON_ONCE() should be sufficient.
-boris
> del_evtchn(u, evtchn);
> return rc;
> }
Powered by blists - more mailing lists