On Fri, 2015-07-10 at 15:57 -0500, Pledge Roy-R01356 wrote: > > > > On Fri, 2015-07-10 at 13:36 +0200, Paul Bolle wrote: > > > On do, 2015-07-09 at 16:21 -0400, Roy Pledge wrote: > > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_FSL_DPA_CHECKING > > > > +#define DPA_ASSERT(x) \ > > > > + do { \ > > > > + if (!(x)) { \ > > > > + pr_crit("ASSERT: (%s:%d) %s\n", __FILE__, > > > > __LINE__, \ > > > > + __stringify_1(x)); \ > > > > + dump_stack(); \ > > > > + panic("assertion failure"); \ > > > > > > Not my call, but why panic() here? > > > > I'm pretty sure I've complained about this before (as well as all the > > BUG_ONs). > > > Is the concern here just the call to panic()? I'm happy to change what > happens when an issue is detected but the DPA_ASSERT() calls are very > useful when testing changes to the driver and when bringing up the drivers > on new silicon variants.
Use WARN_ON() or a variant thereof. -Scott -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html