On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 05:42:53PM +0800, Zheng Liu wrote:
> From: Zheng Liu <wenqing.lz@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> In this commit (921f266b) a sanity check is added in map_blocks to make
> sure 'retval == map->m_len'. But we need to define a macro to enable
> it. This commit uses a WARN_ON to do the same thing.
>
> Signed-off-by: Zheng Liu <wenqing.lz@xxxxxxxxxx>
You and Dmitry were the ones who using originally these these checks
to fix the bugs here; if we think the code is clean enough that we
don't need the debugging information with the inode number, length,
etc., then sure, we could use the unconditionally defined WARN_ON().
If we wanted to be really paranoid and give ourselves the maximal
amount of debugging information, we could of course do something like
this:
if (retval != map->m_len) {
ext4_warning(inode->i_sb, "ES len assertation failed for inode: %lu retval %d != map->m_len %d\n", inode->i_ino, retval,
map->m_len);
WARN_ON(1);
}
This way, we get the stack dump, the file system device, and all of
the debugging information. The tradeoff is we're bloating the code
size a bit.
The question is really how confident are we that we've found all of
the potential bugs here. If we think that there's a chance we might
trip this check in the future, sometimes it's good to print as much
information as possible, especially if it's hard to create a
reproduction on demand.
What do you think?
- Ted
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
