From owner-freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Wed May 11 03:39:33 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44D74B36D82 for ; Wed, 11 May 2016 03:39:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from adrian.chadd@gmail.com) Received: from mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (unknown [127.0.1.3]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 283FA1CB3 for ; Wed, 11 May 2016 03:39:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from adrian.chadd@gmail.com) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 279DCB36D80; Wed, 11 May 2016 03:39:33 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: arch@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27478B36D7D for ; Wed, 11 May 2016 03:39:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from adrian.chadd@gmail.com) Received: from mail-io0-x22c.google.com (mail-io0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::22c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E8EE21CB2; Wed, 11 May 2016 03:39:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from adrian.chadd@gmail.com) Received: by mail-io0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id i75so34342265ioa.3; Tue, 10 May 2016 20:39:32 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc; bh=C8FhrsoxuUdkMPW/sOzwB7tCw1DTzwcxVs/MyUtYqNo=; b=A7Z1kkjKlUF9PWJwzjgyTGMCqjhdZ0xPwriID+tZOHhnJFa9Navf5LgeyfmedlAkIL 0VYEU15D4QeSw9Gq6zuXaLRRJxsigE3DToH+phdQoOFcc7cA7dicb7NoyBVwcFPXkavD NBdNUSEoB+FS+VBUThR8Ie71Hwgas904EmfHQadLx7d2TviGs71Gz8qjIDrBX8x0YO43 TnUQnz6bOVb4JOPzzDLI71Z1UGjXs4x/dZo1euTzjn53RyAkduSyPgLm9HMoY5ad/ELr /ObWfnLmDCRIXZASqhcuGOn3Bf35no0T0y0fewwU1dEHiFcxVIGcXxYpbNYLkDBVySut 3hzA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=C8FhrsoxuUdkMPW/sOzwB7tCw1DTzwcxVs/MyUtYqNo=; b=jMCYPdUWYfZXApDCLqqHkv0OBhaEWAtkOHylysN5K4chwD/V+NDNghivzeIULkDefT D1viJH4yi9tpAyoY3iAEIy0YRlYp7QmWwOxpHnGzQob5DC00VwK9c5nM8QRS5pK5guYu +aeFQB2dsZnWgWFXQjRNW+B7v7zdBO4CWhhSbJBNCdMheCwmSxb3E1ROiXNByYaMT8Cc 65qsJBC3EmODFi9QOopiBR/XqTsUkJXZiEn9dz6Riu/RQO90V6OkDv52hO4XMxYgQ4FH vXbIlzh7XMinBFR/DNittlBriBa5MRFFOfJgEksrx9lyt2n4Th36r/bBQk35JUB3+rB+ PuJg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FXFSrM5jA32fBvlIsOc9JsdNHXDcLPLWAhBohmexcDdLuIVq5bQpU1KYVBAro9U2LdL6EmXxJTFnzOnQw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.107.144.135 with SMTP id s129mr1257211iod.165.1462937972398; Tue, 10 May 2016 20:39:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.36.113.3 with HTTP; Tue, 10 May 2016 20:39:32 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 10 May 2016 20:39:32 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: KASSERT: always assert; KWARN From: Adrian Chadd To: cem@freebsd.org Cc: "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 May 2016 03:39:33 -0000 i found it very useful to get asserts to print, rather than panic. -a On 10 May 2016 at 18:24, Conrad Meyer wrote: > I'd like to logically revert r243980 and r244105, such that KASSERT > uses the __dead2-annotated panic(9). > > Going back to the old behavior enables Coverity and other static > analyzers to reason about KASSERT invariants via the __dead2 panic(9) > path. > > This proposal is in https://reviews.freebsd.org/D6117 . > > As a follow-up, to match the assumed intent of the r243980 changes, I > propose a KWARN facility which may be muted, rate limited, or even > cause panic. Generally, KASSERTs should not be KWARNs. That proposal > is here: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D6134 > > Finally, I am looking for suggestions of things it *does* make sense > to KWARN about. One suggestion was witness_warn; however, it doesn't > seem like a great fit (without adding allocating sbufs in, anyway). A > sketch of that is in https://reviews.freebsd.org/D6306 . > > Thoughts or objections? Does anyone like the ability to opt out of > invariants asserts? > > Best, > Conrad > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-arch@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"