mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
	linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND] bug: When !CONFIG_BUG, simplify WARN_ON_ONCE and family
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 15:17:58 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140224151758.b06125f6ddef2086d2b2a969@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201402240902.35977.arnd@arndb.de>

On Mon, 24 Feb 2014 09:02:35 +0100 Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:

> On Saturday 22 February 2014, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > When !CONFIG_BUG, WARN_ON and family become simple passthroughs of their
> > condition argument; however, WARN_ON_ONCE and family still have
> > conditions and a boolean to detect one-time invocation, even though the
> > warning they'd emit doesn't exist.  Make the existing definitions
> > conditional on CONFIG_BUG, and map them all to the passthrough WARN_ON
> > when !CONFIG_BUG.
> > 
> > This saves 4.4k on a minimized configuration (smaller than
> > allnoconfig), and 20.6k with defconfig plus CONFIG_BUG=n.
> 
> This looks good, but it reminds me of a patch that I did a while ago
> and that got lost while I was on leave:
> 
> > +#else /* !CONFIG_BUG */
> > +#ifndef HAVE_ARCH_BUG
> > +#define BUG() do {} while(0)
> > +#endif
> > +
> > +#ifndef HAVE_ARCH_BUG_ON
> > +#define BUG_ON(condition) do { if (condition) ; } while(0)
> > +#endif
> 
> I've done some analysis of this before[1] and came to the conclusion that
> this definition (which I realize you are not changing) is bad.
> 
> For one thing, it will cause lots of gcc warnings about code that
> should have been unreachable being compiled. It also causes
> misoptimizations for code that should be detected as unused or
> (worse) lets us run into undefined behavior if we ever get into
> the BUG() case.
> 
> This means we actually want BUG() to end with __builtin_unreachable()
> as in the CONFIG_BUG=y case, and also ensure it actually is
> unreachable. As I have shown in [1], the there is a small overhead
> of doing this in terms of code size.

CONFIG_BUG=n causes all sorts of stupid problems.

And as kernel developers we don't *want* people disabling BUG - it
reduces our ability to detect and fix stuff and it adds all sorts of
hard-to-maintain nobody-tests-it things like this.

So...  how about we just do away with CONFIG_BUG?

- Do we know of anyone who is really using this and to good effect?

- Is their use case important/valuable enough for us to continue bothering?


  parent reply	other threads:[~2014-02-24 23:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-02-22 19:23 Josh Triplett
2014-02-22 21:54 ` Randy Dunlap
2014-02-22 22:31   ` Josh Triplett
2014-02-22 22:36     ` Josh Triplett
2014-02-24  8:02 ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-02-24  8:44   ` Josh Triplett
2014-02-24  9:35     ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-02-24 12:09   ` David Howells
2014-02-24 12:42     ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-02-24 13:16       ` One Thousand Gnomes
2014-02-24 13:39         ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-02-24 23:17   ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2014-02-25  3:06     ` Josh Triplett

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20140224151758.b06125f6ddef2086d2b2a969@linux-foundation.org \
    --to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®