Re: [PATCH] a more efficient BUG() macro

From: J . A . Magallon (jamagallon@able.es)
Date: Sat Feb 17 2001 - 19:33:53 EST

  • Next message: Keith Owens: "Re: [PATCH] a more efficient BUG() macro"

    On 02.18 Keith Owens wrote:
    >
    > __C_FILE__ and __C_LINE__ refer to the .c or .s file that included the
    > header, so you get the exact location of the failing code instead of
    > the name and line number of a common header which is used all over the
    > place. __C_FILE__ would be replaced with the minimum string required

    Are you sure about that ?
    Try this:
    a.h:
    #define hello printf("%d at %s\n",__LINE__,__FILE__)

    a.c:
    #include <stdio.h>
    #include "a.h"

    int main()
    {
        hello;
        hello;
        return 0;
    }

    werewolf:~/ko> gcc a.c -o a
    werewolf:~/ko> a
    6 at a.c
    7 at a.c

    (line changes, and name is .c)
    because __FILE__ and __LINE__ are expanded with respect to the current
    SOURCE file (see info cpp), not header file.

    As I said before, my choose would be the __func__ + __LINE__ predefined macros.
    I would prefer to see 'bug in my_buggy_device_init(), line 42'. And you can
    even drop the __LINE__ part. 

    -- 
J.A. Magallon                                                      $> cd pub
mailto:jamagallon@able.es                                          $> more beer

    Linux werewolf 2.4.1-ac17 #1 SMP Sat Feb 17 01:47:56 CET 2001 i686

    -
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Feb 17 2001 - 19:35:28 EST