From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1756204Ab2D0HF7 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 27 Apr 2012 03:05:59 -0400
Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:48470 "EHLO
	mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1750864Ab2D0HF5 (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 27 Apr 2012 03:05:57 -0400
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 00:07:47 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Cc: Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@openvz.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] bug: completely remove code of disabled VM_BUG_ON()
Message-Id: <20120427000747.f1eddcca.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAMuHMdXzLaPoGinwG9EAL5VYAbMdmx+U5m1Fg+53DAQgdi1hxg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20120425112623.26927.43229.stgit@zurg>
	<20120425112629.26927.21609.stgit@zurg>
	<CAMuHMdW7eQh8eaNZrwRHqduPYCjNXv+LriZoH6-ERdkHH2qL8g@mail.gmail.com>
	<20120426153241.6d4762a2.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
	<CAMuHMdXzLaPoGinwG9EAL5VYAbMdmx+U5m1Fg+53DAQgdi1hxg@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.7.1 (GTK+ 2.18.9; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, 27 Apr 2012 07:17:50 +0200 Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 00:32, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> > On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 16:40:32 +0200
> > Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 13:26, Konstantin Khlebnikov
> >> <khlebnikov@openvz.org> wrote:
> >> > Even if CONFIG_DEBUG_VM=n gcc genereates code for some VM_BUG_ON()
> >>
> >> That's because of the side effects of the expression
> >>
> >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/4/25/146
> >>
> >> But IRIC, we do want them here?
> >>
> >
> > AFAICT (lkml.org appears to be having a meltdown), you've gone and
> > linked to this very thread.
> >
> > Please try again, this time avoiding hyperlinks ;)
> 
> Yeah, I noticed after the fact. I wanted to look up the definition of
> unused_expression(), which obviously wasn't in my tree yet ;-)
> 
> Still, I think people started relyong on the side effects, didn't they?

I hope not.  If they are, they snuck it past me cleverly!  A quick grep
of mm/*.c looks clean.