Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 15:04:18 -0500 From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> To: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> Cc: Kirk McKusick <mckusick@mckusick.com>, Christoph Mallon <christoph.mallon@gmx.de>, Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Proposal: Unify printing the function name in panic messages() Message-ID: <201302131504.19142.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <CAJ-Vmo=wwFD7_OF%2BFdJkPyxjQD_4y-yBU6guUHTuCkFr%2BoYh-w@mail.gmail.com> References: <201302120134.r1C1Ycfh026347@chez.mckusick.com> <201302131038.57250.jhb@freebsd.org> <CAJ-Vmo=wwFD7_OF%2BFdJkPyxjQD_4y-yBU6guUHTuCkFr%2BoYh-w@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wednesday, February 13, 2013 2:23:06 pm Adrian Chadd wrote: > ... I hate to be a jerk, but something tells me that relying on the > output of text strings as to the panic cause and then parsing those is > maybe not the right thing to do. > > If it were me, I'd do something like the gettext string API - ie, > panic wouldn't take a string, but a panic string ID, which would > translate to an enum as well as map to a string.. then you could pull > that off. Look, I've had these tests private for years and have used them when working on locking primitives. If you don't want them in the tree I can save myself a whole lot of work and not try to clean them up and update them for rmlocks (where I'm attempting to expand my tests to test some fixes I have to rmlocks because I prefer to thoroughly test the changes I make to locking primitives before I commit them). -- John Baldwin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201302131504.19142.jhb>