On 09/18/2013 06:53 AM, David Rientjes wrote: > On Tue, 17 Sep 2013, Chen Gang wrote: > >>> BUG_ON() is safe. but I still don't like it. As far as I heard, Google >>> changes BUG_ON as nop. So, BUG_ON(mpol_to_str() < 0) breaks google. >>> Please treat an assertion as assertion. Not any other something. >>> > > Google does not disable BUG_ON(), sheesh. > That sounds a good news. >> Hmm... in kernel wide, BUG_ON() is 'common' 'standard' assertion, and >> "mm/" is a common sub-system (not architecture specific), so when we >> use BUG_ON(), we already 'express' our 'opinion' enough to readers. >> > > That's ridiculous, we're not going to panic the kernel at runtime because > a buffer is too small. Make it a compile-time error like I suggested so > we catch this before we even build the kernel. > It seems not quite polite? ;-) BUG_ON() is widely and commonly used in kernel wide, and BUG_ON() can be customized by any architectures, so I guess, if google really think it is necessary, it will customize it. If "compile-time error" will make code complex to both readers and writers (e.g. our case), forcing "compile-time error" may still be good enough to google, but may not be good enough for others. So in my opinion, for our case which is a common sub-system, not an architecture specific sub-system, better use "run-time error". Thanks. -- Chen Gang -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>