linux-kernel - Re: checkpatch, a patch checking script.

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]

Message-Id: <20070428030213.4787031f.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Sat, 28 Apr 2007 03:02:13 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc:	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
	Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: checkpatch, a patch checking script.

On 28 Apr 2007 12:48:55 +0200 Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> wrote:

> Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> writes:
> 
> > box:/usr/src/25> ~/checkpatch.pl patches/slub-core.patch
> > Checking patches/slub-core.patch:  signoffs = 30        
> > Use WARN_ON & Recovery code rather than BUG() and BUG_ON()
> 
> The warning is bogus imho. How do you write recovery code for internal
> broken code logic? 

Yes, it is marginal.  But people do very often reach for BUG_ON() where
they could have at least partly recovered in some fashion - enough for the
info to hit the logs so we have a better chance of fixing it.

BUG_ON() is of course sometimes the right thing to do, but the idea here is
to suggest to the developers that they put a bit of thought into whether it
was really justified.

This little checking tool should have both "error" and "warning" levels -
AKA "fix this" and "think about this" levels.  BUG_ON would be a warning
thing.

-
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/