> This patch adds some straight-forward assertions that check the
> validity of arguments to the list_* inlines. [...]
+ BUG_ON(list == NULL);
+ BUG_ON(list->next == NULL);
+ BUG_ON(list->prev == NULL);
these checks are not needed - they'll trivially be oopsing when trying to
use them, right?
+ BUG_ON(list->next->prev != list);
+ BUG_ON(list->prev->next != list);
these two are indeed nice to have.
+ BUG_ON((list->next == list) && (list->prev != list));
+ BUG_ON((list->prev == list) && (list->next != list));
arent these redundant? If list->next->prev == list and list->prev->next ==
list, then if list->next == list then list->prev == list. Ditto for the
other rule.
so i think we only need the following two checks:
+ BUG_ON(list->next->prev != list);
+ BUG_ON(list->prev->next != list);
and we could as well add these unconditionally (no .config complexity
needed), until 2.6.0 or so, hm?
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Sep 30 2002 - 22:00:39 EST