Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] sched: Use WARN_ON | From | Christophe Leroy <> | Date | Thu, 1 Jul 2021 14:57:59 +0200 |
| |
Le 01/07/2021 à 14:50, Jason Wang a écrit : > The BUG_ON macro simplifies the if condition followed by BUG, but it > will lead to the kernel crashing. Therefore, we can try using WARN_ON > instead of if condition followed by BUG.
But are you sure it is ok to continue if spu_acquire(ctx) returned false ? Shouldn't there be at least for fallback handling ?
Something like:
if (WARN_ON(spu_acquire(ctx))) return;
Christophe
> > Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <wangborong@cdjrlc.com> > --- > arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/spufs/sched.c | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/spufs/sched.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/spufs/sched.c > index 369206489895..0f218d9e5733 100644 > --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/spufs/sched.c > +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/spufs/sched.c > @@ -904,8 +904,8 @@ static noinline void spusched_tick(struct spu_context *ctx) > struct spu_context *new = NULL; > struct spu *spu = NULL; > > - if (spu_acquire(ctx)) > - BUG(); /* a kernel thread never has signals pending */ > + /* a kernel thread never has signals pending */ > + WARN_ON(spu_acquire(ctx)); > > if (ctx->state != SPU_STATE_RUNNABLE) > goto out; >
| |