[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ada4ph6bm8h.fsf@cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2007 14:31:26 -0700
From: Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>
To: "John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>
Cc: Michael Wu <flamingice@...rmilk.net>,
Michael Buesch <mb@...sch.de>, Daniel Drake <dsd@...too.org>,
johannes@...solutions.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mac80211: Fix TX after monitor interface is converted to managed
> Programming with assertions (and BUG_ON is a form of that) is
> generally a good practice. Almost any book or other source on
> good programming practices will agree. Yes, it can be overdone.
> But I don't really think that is the case here, since the check is
> relatively inexpensive and the consequence should it ever *somehow*
> happen could be a something wierd (crash, corruption, etc) w/o any
> other indication of what occured.
The problem with BUG_ON is that it kills the whole system. So every
time you add a BUG_ON into code, you have to weigh whether the problem
you detected is so severe that the right response is to panic. For
example, I can see panicking on something fundamental like corrupted
page tables. However I would submit that the wireless stack should
*never* use BUG_ON -- printing a warning and trying to limp on seems
preferable to me.
- R.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists