linux-kernel - [PATCH] checkpatch: Warn on BUG and BUG

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:	Sun, 07 Jun 2015 22:44:01 -0700
From:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>,
	Louis Langholtz <lou_langholtz@...com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	trivial@...nel.org, Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
Subject: [PATCH] checkpatch: Warn on BUG and BUG_ON uses

Spake Linus:

> Hell no.
> 
> Stop with the random BUG_ON() additions.
> 
> I have said this before, and apparently I need to sat this again, and
> probably I will have to say it in the future.
> 
> We don't add BUG_ON's for random reasons.
> 
> The *ONLY* acceptable reason for a BUG_ON() is if the machine is dead
> anyway because of some major internal corruption.
> 
> We have too many BUG_ON's. We've had people add BUG_ON's because "this
> cannot happen", and then it turns out they were wrong, and they just
> killed the machine.
> 
> Dammit, there's no reason to add a BUG_ON() here in the first place,
> and the reason of "but but it's an unused error return": is f*cking
> retarded.
> 
> Stop this idiocy. We don't write crap code just to satisfy some random
> coding standard or shut up a compiler error.
> 
> At most, it could be a "WARN_ON_ONCE()". Maybe even just silently
> ignore the error. But BUG_ON()? Hell no.
>
> NO NO NO.
> 
> Quite frankly, if you want to add error handling, then dammit, add it
> right. And no, BUG_ON() is _never_ proper error handling.
> 
> BUG_ON() is for things like "uhhuh, somebody is trying to free a page
> that is already free". That is some serious internal corruption.
> 
> BUG_ON() is _not_ for "I'm not doing any error handling, so I'll
> sprinkle random lines of BUG_ON() like fairy dust to make the compiler
> happen".
> 
> Really.  I'm getting very tired indeed of people adding BUG_ON's like
> that. Stop it.

Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
---
 scripts/checkpatch.pl | 11 +++++------
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
index 69c4716..f3daa4e 100755
--- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
+++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
@@ -3423,12 +3423,11 @@ sub process {
 			}
 		}
 
-# # no BUG() or BUG_ON()
-# 		if ($line =~ /\b(BUG|BUG_ON)\b/) {
-# 			print "Try to use WARN_ON & Recovery code rather than BUG() or BUG_ON()\n";
-# 			print "$herecurr";
-# 			$clean = 0;
-# 		}
+# avoid BUG() or BUG_ON()
+		if ($line =~ /\b(BUG|BUG_ON)\b/) {
+			WARN("BUG",
+			     "Avoid using $1 unless there is a serious corruption - try to use WARN_ON & recovery code instead\n" .  $herecurr);
+		}
 
 		if ($line =~ /\bLINUX_VERSION_CODE\b/) {
 			WARN("LINUX_VERSION_CODE",


--
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/