svn commit: r244112 - head/sys/kern

[Alfred Perlstein]

On 12/15/12 6:17 AM, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 05:29:10AM -0800, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> A> On 12/15/12 5:01 AM, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
> A> > On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 04:35:25AM -0800, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> A> > A> People keep beating this drum "all invariants/panics are there for a
> A> > A> reason", no, some happen to be bugs, and when I'm shipping code to a
> A> > A> customer, I may need to skip one of these buggy assertions.
> A> >
> A> > Yes, if you know any buggy assertions, please remove them from FreeBSD tree.
> A> >
> A> > A> Some people have responded to this by saying "alfred show me the buggy
> A> > A> assertions" to which my response is two fold "firstly, you're calling me
> A> > A> a liar which I do not appreciate, second prove to me that all the 1000s
> A> > A> of asserts have zero bugs and are not overly zealous about calling panic."
> A> >
> A> > We are not going to prove that. If you claim that some assertion is buggy,
> A> > you prove that it is buggy and happily remove it from source tree. Noone
> A> > is going to spend time proving you that 1000s of assertions are not buggy.
> A> >
> A> > Home reading for you:
> A> >
> A> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot
> A> >
> A> Here is some reading for you:
> A>
> A> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> A> r244044 | adrian | 2012-12-08 17:08:44 -0800 (Sat, 08 Dec 2012) | 10 lines
> A>
> A> Don't panic if the stageq here is empty; just fall through with NULL
> A> pointers and leave the stage queue flush routine to just do nothing
> A> (since both head and tail here will be NULL.)
> A>
> A> This should quieten the "stageq empty" panic where the stageq itself
> A> is empty, but it won't fix the second KASSERT() here "staging queue empty"
> A> as that's likely a different underlying problem.
> A>
> A> PR:             kern/174283
>
> Yes, and important thing is that no one argued against this change, because
> Adrian explained that this particular assertion was incorrect and removed it.
>
> If you know any more incorrect assertions, please remove them as well, and
> no one will argue about that. But do not switch off all assertions in kernel.
>
Excuse me?  where are the assertions switched off?

-Alfred