Re: [PATCH 2/2] ring-buffer: replace most bug ons with warn on anddisable buffer

[Ingo Molnar]

* Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> +#define RB_WARN_ON_RET_INT(buffer, cond)			\
> +	do {							\
> +		if (unlikely(cond)) {				\
> +			atomic_inc(&buffer->record_disabled);	\
> +			WARN_ON(1);				\
>  			return -1;				\
>  		}						\

btw., the _RET() methods are rather ugly as they include an implicit 
code flow change (a 'return' statement).

Please change it to a more readable form that preserves the code flow, 
something like:

  if (RB_WARN_ON(buffer, cond))
	return -1;

See kernel/lockdep.c about how to do this cleanly: introduce a 
_single_ global "oh, we are broken" flag which is increased once and 
never decreased again.

In the case of lockdep that's the debug_locks flag. It's used in 
various code-flow-preserving forms of debug checks:

...
        if (DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(depth >= 20))
                return;
...
                if (!debug_locks_off_graph_unlock())
                        return NULL;
...
        if (!debug_locks_off_graph_unlock())
                return 0;
...
        if (!__raw_spin_is_locked(&lockdep_lock))
                return DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(1);

etc.

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/