[dm-devel] [PATCH] md: dm-writeback: add __noreturn to BUG-ging function

[Randy Dunlap]

On 11/15/20 11:30 PM, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> 
> 
> On 13.11.20 23:52, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>> Building on arch/s390/ flags this as an error, so add the
>> __noreturn attribute modifier to prevent the build error.
>>
>> cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
>> ../drivers/md/dm-writecache.c: In function 'persistent_memory_claim':
>> ../drivers/md/dm-writecache.c:323:1: error: no return statement in function returning non-void [-Werror=return-type]
> 
> ok with me, but I am asking why
> 
> the unreachable macro is not good enough. For x86 it obviously is.
> 
> form arch/s390/include/asm/bug.h
> #define BUG() do {                                      \
>         __EMIT_BUG(0);                                  \
>         unreachable();                                  \
> } while (0)
> 

Hi Christian,

Good question.
I don't see any guidance about when to use one or the other etc.

I see __noreturn being used 109 times and unreachable();
being used 33 times, but only now that I look at them.
That had nothing to do with why I used __noreturn in the patch.

> 
>>
>> Fixes: 48debafe4f2f ("dm: add writecache target")
>> Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap at infradead.org>
>> Cc: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka at redhat.com>
>> Cc: Alasdair Kergon <agk at redhat.com>
>> Cc: Mike Snitzer <snitzer at redhat.com>
>> Cc: dm-devel at redhat.com
>> Cc: Heiko Carstens <hca at linux.ibm.com>
>> Cc: Vasily Gorbik <gor at linux.ibm.com>
>> Cc: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger at de.ibm.com>
>> Cc: linux-s390 at vger.kernel.org
>> ---
>>  drivers/md/dm-writecache.c |    2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> --- linux-next-20201113.orig/drivers/md/dm-writecache.c
>> +++ linux-next-20201113/drivers/md/dm-writecache.c
>> @@ -317,7 +317,7 @@ err1:
>>  	return r;
>>  }
>>  #else
>> -static int persistent_memory_claim(struct dm_writecache *wc)
>> +static int __noreturn persistent_memory_claim(struct dm_writecache *wc)
>>  {
>>  	BUG();
>>  }
>>

thanks.
-- 
~Randy