RE: [PATCH] checkpatch: Include GEM_BUG_xxx variant in the excluded check list

[Ruhl, Michael J]

>-----Original Message-----
>From: David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx>
>Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2023 11:28 AM
>To: Ruhl, Michael J <michael.j.ruhl@xxxxxxxxx>; Joe Perches
><joe@xxxxxxxxxxx>; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; apw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx;
>dwaipayanray1@xxxxxxxxx; lukas.bulwahn@xxxxxxxxx; corbet@xxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: Include GEM_BUG_xxx variant in the
>excluded check list
>
>On 15.06.23 17:04, Ruhl, Michael J wrote:
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2023 9:47 PM
>>> To: Ruhl, Michael J <michael.j.ruhl@xxxxxxxxx>; linux-
>kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
>>> apw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; dwaipayanray1@xxxxxxxxx;
>lukas.bulwahn@xxxxxxxxx;
>>> corbet@xxxxxxx; david@xxxxxxxxxx
>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: Include GEM_BUG_xxx variant in the
>>> excluded check list
>>>
>>> On Wed, 2023-06-14 at 12:49 -0400, Michael J. Ruhl wrote:
>>>> GEM_BUG_ON is usually compiled as WARN.  You have to change to
>>>> debug configuration to get this to be BUG.
>>>>
>>>> checkpatch flags this a WARN level issue.
>>>>
>>>> Since this is a i915 local debug macro, allow its use in checkpatch.pl.
>>>>
>>>> Fixes: 69d517e6e210 ("checkpatch: warn on usage of VM_BUG_ON() and
>>> other BUG variants")
>>>
>>> Not a "Fixes", just an additional check
>>
>
>That was discussed when developing that patch:
>
>https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/87tu5vflld.fsf@xxxxxxxxx/T/
>
>GEM_BUG_ON(
>-> Bad with CONFIG_DRM_I915_DEBUG_GEM_ONCE
>
>Just like VM_BUG_ON or CI_BUG_ON... that BUGs only with another kernel
>config on.
>
>So this is expected.

Hmm,

Ok.

Maybe next time.

M

>--
>Cheers,
>
>David / dhildenb