On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 12:00:03PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: > Due to commit 00e769d04c2c83029d6c71(btrfs-progs: Correct value printed > by assertions/BUG_ON/WARN_ON), which changed the assert_trace() > parameter, the condition passed to assert/WARN_ON/BUG_ON are logical > notted for backtrace enabled and disabled case. > > Such behavior makes us easier to pass value wrong, and in fact it did > cause us to pass wrong condition for ASSERT(). > > Instead of passing different conditions for ASSERT/WARN_ON/BUG_ON() > manually, this patch will use ASSERT() to implement the resting > ASSERT/WARN_ON/BUG() for disable backtrace case, and use assert_trace() > to implement ASSERT() and BUG_ON(), to allow them to print correct > value. > > Also, move WARN_ON() out of the ifdef branch, as it's completely the > same for both branches. > > Cc: Goldwyn Rodrigues <[email protected]> > Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <[email protected]>
Applied, thanks. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
