On 19 March 2018 at 18:17, Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Quoting Matthew Auld (2018-03-19 18:08:54) >> GEM_WARN_ON() was originally intended to be used only as: >> >> if (GEM_WARN_ON(expr)) >> ... >> >> but it just so happens to also work as simply: >> >> GEM_WARN_ON(expr); >> >> since it just wraps WARN_ON, which is a little misleading since for >> !DRM_I915_DEBUG_GEM builds the second case will actually break the >> build. Given that there are some patches floating around which seem to >> miss this, it probably makes sense to just make it work for both cases. > > That really was quite intentional. The only time to use GEM_WARN_ON() is > inside an if, otherwise what's the point? Why wouldn't we want it to behave like WARN_ON? That seems to be what people expect, since it does wrap WARN_ON, and we don't always use WARN_ON in an if... _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
