From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754230AbYHQQeS (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 Aug 2008 12:34:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751961AbYHQQeI (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 Aug 2008 12:34:08 -0400 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:56731 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751921AbYHQQeH (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 Aug 2008 12:34:07 -0400 Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2008 09:33:09 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Theodore Tso Cc: Alexey Dobriyan , torvalds@linuxfoundation.org, rusty@rustcorp.com.au, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] BUILD_BUG_ON sucks Message-Id: <20080817093309.a5d68eb0.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20080817121906.GE8774@mit.edu> References: <20080816100948.GB19926@martell.zuzino.mipt.ru> <20080816104658.dcdfb0db.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080817121906.GE8774@mit.edu> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.4.8 (GTK+ 2.12.5; 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: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 08:19:06 -0400 Theodore Tso wrote: > On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 10:46:58AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > what this code is supposed to do? > > > > > > journal = handle->h_transaction->t_journal; > > > if (!journal_set_features(journal, 0, 0, JFS_FEATURE_INCOMPAT_REVOKE)) { > > > J_ASSERT (!"Cannot set revoke feature!"); > > > ^^^^ > > > > lol. It's been there since I merged ext3 in 2.4.15. Probably it was > > in sct's ext3 patches in the RH kernel. > > > > Don't change it - it might be important! > > Heh! Well, it does the right thing, and doesn't take any extra text > space assuming a vaguely competent C compiler optimizer. :-) > > I'm pretty sure that back in the 2.4 days, we didn't have BUG_ON. We > should do a s/J_ASSERT/BUG_ON/g pass over all of fs/jbd and fs/jbd2. > I'll submit patches for application when the 2.6.27 merge window opens > up --- or is this an obvious enough and safe enough transformation > that it will get accepted mainline at this point? > May as well get it over and done with. We presently have a mix of J_ASSERT, J_ASSERT_JH and J_ASSERT_BH. That will become BUG_ON, J_ASSERT_JH and J_ASSERT_BH. Which a is slightly unpleasing loss of consistency but whatever.