On Tuesday 28 May 2013, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 05/28/2013 08:43 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >
> > Right, that is what the patch I just posted does.
> >
> > On a related note, I found that WARN_ON() can no longer be compiled
> > out since there is already code that relies on the side-effects of
> > the condition. I assume that was an intentional change I missed,
> > since it used to be defined so that you could remove it completely.
> >
>
> It is possible to define WARN_ON() as:
>
> #define WARN_ON(x) ((void)(x))
>
> ... which preserves side effects.
Yes, actually the return value has to be maintained as well.
The current (!CONFIG_BUG) default implementation is
#define WARN_ON(condition) ({ \
int __ret_warn_on = !!(condition); \
unlikely(__ret_warn_on); \
})
which seems fine.
#define WARN_ON(condition) unlikely(!!(condition))
is probably just as good.
Arnd
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
