On Sat, Mar 18, 2000 at 02:32:55AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Mar 2000, Manfred Spraul wrote:
>
> > Will BUG() remain enabled in 2.4? I always assumed that BUG() is the
> > replacement for "*(int*)0=0", and that it remains enabled in 2.4.
>
> i believe so. We do want to manage BUG()s though, and cut down their
> number once any of them becomes inactive. But a fair percentage of them
> proved to be extremely useful through 2.3. This means that any assert
> should live the life of a 'BUG()' line: get added with new code, and get
> removed after some time.
I've noticed that the __FILE__ string created by the occurences of BUG()
and other debugging macros all over the place seem to create duplicate
strings in the kernel image, but if I do a simple userspace test of
printing __FILE__ twice, the compiler/linker combines the duplicate
strings into one. Does anybody know what's going on here?
[sroot@oof:/d/linux]# strings vmlinux | grep /d/linux/ | wc -l
2032
[sroot@oof:/d/linux]# strings vmlinux | grep /d/linux/ | sort -u | wc -l
13
Also, there are a large number of occurences of the printk string from
the BUG() macro:
[sroot@oof:/d/linux]# strings vmlinux | grep 'kernel BUG' | wc -l
353
Is there some option we're missing somewhere that collapses these
duplicate strings together?
I wrote a patch to change the BUG() macro to call an exported
__print_bug() function so that the printk() string wasn't duplicated, but
I can't figure out how to get the __FILE__ string collapsed easily.
Also, as it seems to happen in userspace automatically, so perhaps there
is a better way?
Simon-
[ Stormix Technologies Inc. ][ NetNation Communcations Inc. ]
[ sim@stormix.com ][ sim@netnation.com ]
[ Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of my employers. ]
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Mar 23 2000 - 21:00:24 EST