(2014/01/21 23:02), Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Tue, 21 Jan 2014 14:00:37 +0100 > Petr Mladek <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> There are some situations where it is hard to recover from an error. Masami >>>> Hiramatsu <[email protected]> suggested to create >>>> text_poke*_or_die() variants for this purpose. >>> >>> I don't like the "_or_die()". Although I don't care much about it, I'm >>> thinking the x86 maintainers might not like it either. >>> >>> What about just doing the test in the places that would call "or_die"? >>> >>> ret = text_poke*(); >>> BUG_ON(ret); >> >> Exactly this solution has been used in v5 of this patch set, see >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/12/3/258 >> >> Masami suggested to use the "or_die()" because BUG_ON() was used on most >> locations, see https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/12/6/1107 > > If BUG_ON() is used in most locations, then we can make text_poke() > default to bug, and the just have a text_poke_safe() function that does > not bug. Or some similar name.
Unfortunately, since still there is BUG_ON() in text_poke() when we failed to modify text, I think text_poke_safe() is not a good name too. > The "_die" has a bad taste in several developers mouth ;-) What about using text_poke() for BUG_ON and __text_poke() for returning an error ? This may not change caller sites. Thank you, -- Masami HIRAMATSU IT Management Research Dept. Linux Technology Center Hitachi, Ltd., Yokohama Research Laboratory E-mail: [email protected] -- 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/
