Re: [PATCH 0/2] Stop some of the abuse of BUG() where compile timechecks should be used.

[DM]

On 2011-11-22 02:31, David Daney wrote:
> From: David Daney <david.daney@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> After some, perhaps justified, reluctance to merge dummy symbol
> definitions  containing BUG() into header files, I propose these patches
> instead.
> 
> We define a new compile time assertion BUILD_BUG_ON_USED() that can be
> used in places were we expect the compiler's dead code elimination to
> get rid of code.  This happens mostly in code dealing with huge pages,
> but in other places as well.
> 
> The first patch adds BUILD_BUG_ON_USED(), the second gets rid of one
> of the main abusers of BUG().
> 

Perhaps BUILD_BUG() is a more consistent name for this?

We would then have BUG() and BUG_ON(x) for run-time vs BUILD_BUG() and BUILD_BUG_ON(x) for compile-time.

/DM
--
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/