list debugging: use WARN() instead of BUG()

Arjan noted that the list_head debugging is BUG'ing when it detects
corruption.  By causing the box to panic immediately, we're possibly
losing some bug reports.  Changing this to a WARN() should mean we at the
least start seeing reports collected at kerneloops.org

Signed-off-by: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>
Cc: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>

1 files changed, 14 insertions, 22 deletions

diff --git a/lib/list_debug.c b/lib/list_debug.c
index 45c03fd608dd..1a39f4e3ae1f 100644
--- a/lib/list_debug.c
+++ b/lib/list_debug.c
@@ -20,18 +20,14 @@ void __list_add(struct list_head *new,
                               struct list_head *prev,
                               struct list_head *next)
 {
-        if (unlikely(next->prev != prev)) {
-                printk(KERN_ERR "list_add corruption. next->prev should be "
-                        "prev (%p), but was %p. (next=%p).\n",
-                        prev, next->prev, next);
-                BUG();
-        }
-        if (unlikely(prev->next != next)) {
-                printk(KERN_ERR "list_add corruption. prev->next should be "
-                        "next (%p), but was %p. (prev=%p).\n",
-                        next, prev->next, prev);
-                BUG();
-        }
+        WARN(next->prev != prev,
+                "list_add corruption. next->prev should be "
+                "prev (%p), but was %p. (next=%p).\n",
+                prev, next->prev, next);
+        WARN(prev->next != next,
+                "list_add corruption. prev->next should be "
+                "next (%p), but was %p. (prev=%p).\n",
+                next, prev->next, prev);
         next->prev = new;
         new->next = next;
         new->prev = prev;
@@ -47,16 +43,12 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(__list_add);
  */
 void list_del(struct list_head *entry)
 {
-        if (unlikely(entry->prev->next != entry)) {
-                printk(KERN_ERR "list_del corruption. prev->next should be %p, "
-                                "but was %p\n", entry, entry->prev->next);
-                BUG();
-        }
-        if (unlikely(entry->next->prev != entry)) {
-                printk(KERN_ERR "list_del corruption. next->prev should be %p, "
-                                "but was %p\n", entry, entry->next->prev);
-                BUG();
-        }
+        WARN(entry->prev->next != entry,
+                "list_del corruption. prev->next should be %p, "
+                "but was %p\n", entry, entry->prev->next);
+        WARN(entry->next->prev != entry,
+                "list_del corruption. next->prev should be %p, "
+                "but was %p\n", entry, entry->next->prev);
         __list_del(entry->prev, entry->next);
         entry->next = LIST_POISON1;
         entry->prev = LIST_POISON2;