Hi Artem, Pekka Enberg wrote:On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 1:26 PM, Artem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@nokia.com> wrote: I don't know how many times I have to say this: you're doing it at the wrong level! The reason you want to compile them out is because you've added crap like this all over your code paths: ubifs_assert(PageLocked(page)); ubifs_assert(!PageChecked(page)); ubifs_assert(!PagePrivate(page)); So instead of arguing about this you really ought to look at what SLUB, for example, does. It's perfectly okay to have _debugging checks_ compiled out (stuff like verify_inode and such) but at the assertion level it makes no sense whatsoever! Pekka Enberg wrote: On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 1:26 PM, Artem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@nokia.com> wrote: So what? It's still an ad hoc debugging printout with no particular meaning whatsoever. But this discussion is getting nowhere and I have better things to do than argue about this over and over again. So to reiterate my review comments on this: - Kill your home-grown assert - Fix up your logging messages to actually make sense - Perhaps introduce a ubifs_error() thingy and convert as much code to use that - Reduce the amount of debug Kconfig options You can ignore these comments as my personal preferences all you want in which case I can only wish you good luck with merging this thing upstream. Pekka --
| Andrew Morton | Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23 -- sys_fallocate |
| Greg KH | [GIT PATCH] driver core patches against 2.6.24 |
| Andrew Morton | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
| Stephen Rothwell | Re: Announce: Linux-next (Or Andrew's dream :-)) |
git: | |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 0/37] dccp: Feature negotiation - last call for comments |
| David Miller | [GIT]: Networking |
| Andrew Morton | Re: [BUG] New Kernel Bugs |
| David Miller | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
