On Wed, 24 Aug 2016, Casey Bodley wrote: > On 08/24/2016 11:45 AM, Adam C. Emerson wrote: > > On 24/08/2016, Matt Benjamin wrote: > > > Mark Nelson called attention to this topic again yesterday in #ceph-devel. > > > > > > We favor retaining the ability to re-declare specific asserts such that > > > they are, as with assert in general historically, compiled out. I think > > > it's reasonable if this is a marked case. > > > > > > That seems to imply that if ceph_assert is the unmarked case, it won't be > > > compiled out, so is essentially ceph_assert_always, as below (or else that > > > form should be used...it's a little long). > > If we want to go for brevity, we could have ceph_assert() be the > > unmarked case that functions just like assert macro. > > > > Then we could use something like ceph_demand() (ceph_ultimatum? > > ceph_blackmail?) to indicate the case that isn't compiled out. > > > > Personally, I would just like to get rid of Ceph's assert.h and its > > unending war with every other header file in the world. At one point > > killed off the header and linked in an object that overrode > > __assert_fail. This worked very well, though it would require handling > > every C library implementation we're compiled against. > > > > I dug up an old commit as an example of overriding libc's __assert_fail() > function, which would allow us to use the system's assert.h as is: > https://github.com/cohortfsllc/cohortfs-ceph/commit/40956ad3661192462246ed7e5435522c5708ffbc Oh, this looks nice. In that case, we still need a ceph_abort (and an associated cleanup). I think we also still need some distinction between asserts that are safe to compile out and those that are not, though. sage -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
