On Wed, 2012-02-29 at 10:31 +0200, Kalle Valo wrote:
> Luciano Coelho <coelho@xxxxxx> writes:
>
> >> @@ -973,8 +974,14 @@ void wl12xx_tx_reset(struct wl1271 *wl, bool reset_tx_queues)
> >> struct sk_buff *skb;
> >> struct ieee80211_tx_info *info;
> >>
> >> - for (i = 0; i < NUM_TX_QUEUES; i++)
> >> - wl->tx_queue_count[i] = 0;
> >> + /* only reset the queues if something bad happened */
> >> + if (WARN_ON(wl1271_tx_total_queue_count(wl) != 0)) {
> >
> > Let's make all these WARN_ONs as WARN_ON_ONCE as it is recommended
> > nowadays. This will make Kalle Valo happier. :)
>
> Hehe. Actually the dislike against WARN_ON() was started by John, I
> again started the war to killing BUG_ON() :)
Right, John's email was where I got the "recommended" from. ;)
> But nevertheless, this changes makes also me happy. I have seen cases
> where the whole system reboots because of WARN_ON() spam, so
> WARN_ON_ONCE() is much better in in cases where's a possibility that it
> will get printed a lot. Of course printk_ratelimit() is another option,
> but for some reason it isn't that popular.
Yeah, I totally agree. Especially when we have a loop, WARN_ON_ONCE
should be sufficient, in my opinion.
--
Cheers,
Luca.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
