cvs commit: src/sys/alpha/alpha support.s src/sys/i386/i386 swtch.s src/sys/kern kern_shutdown.c src/sys/sys systm.h

[Marcel Moolenaar]

On Wed, Feb 18, 2004 at 02:14:00PM -0500, John Baldwin wrote:
*snip*
> Thus, you have:
> 
> #define	KASSERT(condition)	KASSERTL(condition, __FILE__, __LINE__)
> #define	KASSERTV(condition, ...) KASSERTLV(condition, __FILE__, __LINE__, \
>  	__VA_ARGS__)
> #define	KASSERTL(condition, file, line)	KASSERTLV(condition, file, line, \
> 	"%s", __STRING(condition))
> #define	KASSERTLV(condition, file, line, ...) do { \
> 		if (!(condition)) { \
> 			printf("Assertion \""); \
> 			printf(__VA_ARGS__); \
> 			printf("\" failed at %s:%d\n", file, line); \
> 		} \
> } while(0)
> 
> Even nicer might be to make fixup_filename() from subr_witness.c a global 
> #ifdef INVARIANTS_SUPPORT and have KASSERTLV() use that (it trims any (../)* 
> from the front of a filename to improve readability of messages by just 
> returning a char * pointer farther along in the string).

Yes, looks very workable to me (KASSERTLV needs to panic though :-)
The only downside is that we need to visit any existing KASSERTs.
See also below.

> If ASSERT() is preferred to KASSERT() that would certain ease the transition 
> to the different macros.

That's the reason I threw in ASSERT. If KASSERT remains unchanged, then
the switch/adoption is much easer because there are no ABI breakages.
Other than that, I don't care much if it's called ASSERT or KASSERT.

/me says: go for s/MPASS/ASSERT/g...

-- 
 Marcel Moolenaar	  USPA: A-39004		 marcel at xcllnt.net