On Sat, 17 Nov 2007 10:39:47 -0800 Arjan van de Ven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Nov 2007 10:27:20 -0800
> Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 17 Nov 2007 10:15:52 -0800 Arjan van de Ven
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > @@ -35,8 +36,8 @@ struct bug_entry {
> > > #define WARN_ON(condition)
> > > ({ \ int
> > > __ret_warn_on = !!(condition); \ if
> > > (unlikely(__ret_warn_on)) { \
> > > - printk("WARNING: at %s:%d %s()\n",
> > > __FILE__, \
> > > - __LINE__,
> > > __FUNCTION__); \
> > > + printk("WARNING: at %s:%d %s() (%s)\n",
> > > __FILE__, \
> > > + __LINE__, __FUNCTION__,
> > > UTS_RELEASE); \
> > > dump_stack();
> > > \ }
> > > \ unlikely(__ret_warn_on); \
> >
> > that made our 1100-odd WARN_ON sites fatter.
>
> by ... not too much at least, gcc ought to be quite good at merging
> same-strings into one, so it's just one extra pointer argument
>
I think I knew that. At 1000 callsites.
-
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/
