The purpose of this was to catch more information next time you see this
bug in the automated testing; do you run it with debug=y?
If so, I'll change it to #ifndef NDEBUG ... #else BUG_ON() ... #endif
-George
On Thu, 2011-03-03 at 16:38 +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> George Dunlap writes ("[Xen-devel] [PATCH] credit2: Add more debugging"):
> > Signed-off-by: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ...
> > + /* DEBUG */
>
> Shouldn't this be in an #ifdef or something rather than just marked
> with a comment ?
>
> > + if ( !is_idle_vcpu(scurr->vcpu) && scurr->rqd != rqd)
> > + {
> > + int other_rqi=-1, this_rqi;
> > +
> > + this_rqi=c2r(ops, cpu);
> > +
> > + if ( scurr->rqd )
> > + {
> > + int rq;
> > + other_rqi=-2;
> > + for_each_cpu_mask(rq, CSCHED_PRIV(ops)->active_queues)
> > + {
> > + if ( scurr->rqd == &CSCHED_PRIV(ops)->rqd[rq] )
> > + {
> > + other_rqi = rq;
> > + break;
> > + }
> > + }
> > + }
> > + printk("%s: pcpu %d rq %d, but scurr d%dv%d assigned to pcpu %d rq
> > %d!\n",
> > + __func__,
> > + cpu, this_rqi,
> > + scurr->vcpu->domain->domain_id, scurr->vcpu->vcpu_id,
> > + scurr->vcpu->processor, other_rqi);
> > + }
> > BUG_ON(!is_idle_vcpu(scurr->vcpu) && scurr->rqd != rqd);
>
> And in general this seems like a somewhat odd construct.
>
> Ian.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Home