| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2011 15:19:05 +0800 From: Coly Li <i@...y.li> To: Yong Zhang <yong.zhang0@...il.com> CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] use BUG_ON correctly On 2011年01月27日 14:20, Yong Zhang Wrote: > On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 2:38 PM, Coly Li<i@...y.li> wrote: >> On 2011年01月27日 14:07, Yong Zhang Wrote: >>> >>> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 2:21 PM, Coly Li<i@...y.li> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 2011年01月27日 10:02, Yong Zhang Wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 2:39 AM, Coly Li<bosong.ly@...bao.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> BUG_ON() already uses unlikely() inside its definition if possible, >>>>> >>>>> It's true for asm-generic/bug.h. >>>>> >>>>> But for archs which has defined HAVE_ARCH_BUG, >>>>> unlikely() is not always included in it. >>>>> >>>> >>>> IMHO, if this condition happens, it should be a bug of the arch >>>> implementation, >>> >>> So that means we should fix that first :) >>> >> >> Could you please to identify a piece of kernel code which provides an >> example as the condition you mentioned ? >> So I can have a look firstly. > > # line filename / context / line > 1 35 arch/mips/include/asm/bug.h<<HAVE_ARCH_BUG_ON>> > #define HAVE_ARCH_BUG_ON > 2 115 arch/powerpc/include/asm/bug.h<<HAVE_ARCH_BUG_ON>> > #define HAVE_ARCH_BUG_ON I don't find arch dependent implementation of BUG_ON from the above files. Do I miss something ? -- Coly Li -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists