On Sat, 17 Nov 2007 10:27:20 -0800
Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Nov 2007 10:15:52 -0800 Arjan van de Ven
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > @@ -35,8 +36,8 @@ struct bug_entry {
> > #define WARN_ON(condition)
> > ({ \ int
> > __ret_warn_on = !!(condition); \ if
> > (unlikely(__ret_warn_on)) { \
> > - printk("WARNING: at %s:%d %s()\n",
> > __FILE__, \
> > - __LINE__,
> > __FUNCTION__); \
> > + printk("WARNING: at %s:%d %s() (%s)\n",
> > __FILE__, \
> > + __LINE__, __FUNCTION__,
> > UTS_RELEASE); \
> > dump_stack();
> > \ }
> > \ unlikely(__ret_warn_on); \
>
> that made our 1100-odd WARN_ON sites fatter.
by ... not too much at least, gcc ought to be quite good at merging
same-strings into one, so it's just one extra pointer argument
--
If you want to reach me at my work email, use [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For development, discussion and tips for power savings,
visit http://www.lesswatts.org
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
