linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] remove BUG() in possible but rare condition

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 11 Apr 2012 11:57:56 -0700
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>
Cc:	Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devel@...nvz.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	cgroups@...r.kernel.org, Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com, Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>,
	Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@...gle.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] remove BUG() in possible but rare condition

On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 11:48 AM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz> wrote:
>
> I am not familiar with the code much but a trivial call chain walk up to
> write_dev_supers (in btrfs) shows that we do not check for the return value
> from __getblk so we would nullptr and there might be more.
> I guess these need some treat before the BUG might be removed, right?

Well, realistically, isn't BUG() as bad as a NULL pointer dereference?

Do you care about the exact message on the screen when your machine dies?

                     Linus
--
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/