linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: BUG in pcnet32.c?

To: Brian Murphy <brian@murphy.dk>
Subject: Re: BUG in pcnet32.c?
From: Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2004 10:39:00 +0200
Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org
In-reply-to: <406D240C.8020208@murphy.dk>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <4068809F.8070103@murphy.dk> <4068864D.1020209@realitydiluted.com> <406B2E90.5060307@murphy.dk> <20040401173154.GA30634@linux-mips.org> <406D240C.8020208@murphy.dk>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
User-agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
On Fri, Apr 02, 2004 at 10:27:56AM +0200, Brian Murphy wrote:

> >The more information BUG or BUG_ON provide the bigger the kernel gets.
> >Using a simple break instruction was simply the smallest thing.  The
> >previous, just slightly more verbose BUG() implementation did result
> >in ~ 87k of bloat ...
> > 
> >
> Perhaps you could mention this usage of break explicitly in the message 
> in do_bp.

That's easy, BUG() and BUG_ON() if the condition was met use a break
instruction.

  Ralf

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>