linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] add a trivial patch style checker

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: <20070529142222.GC18437@osiris.boeblingen.de.ibm.com>
Date:	Tue, 29 May 2007 16:22:22 +0200
From:	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
To:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc:	Andy Whitcroft <apw@...dowen.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
	Joel Schopp <jschopp@...tin.ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] add a trivial patch style checker

> > > Possible further checks that might make sense:
> > > - panic() anywhere in drivers/* 
> > 
> > A driver should be allowed to panic. E.g. if it detects that due to a
> > firmware or driver bug memory corruption happened. IMHO the best thing
> > to do then is panic.
> 
> That is not how Linux normally operates. A BUG() doesn't panic() by
> default either.
> 
> And on systems with IOMMU that is exactly the wrong thing to do.
> 
> Besides the problem is that bad drivers tend to badly abuse it
> (e.g. see some particular BSD derviced SCSI drivers). We definitely
> don't want any more of such code.

So you prefer random data corruption over an emergency stop?
That doesn't make much sense to me...
-
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/