| 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: Tue, 29 May 2007 16:58:18 +0200 From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> To: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, 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 > So you prefer random data corruption over an emergency stop? With an oops you can at least recover the system and actually look at the problem. On a machine with a panic you're just dead and the probability of actually being able to do something about the problem is much lower. On x86 systems you typically don't even get any message out. And I'm not convinced drivers are in a good position to decide if memory was likely corrupted or not anyways. At least the panics I see in driver sources seem to be just random logic bugs from someone not familiar with BUG(). Also they typically don't make much attempt to figure out if there might have been data corruption. If you're really worried about memory corruption in drivers you should just use an IOMMU. > That doesn't make much sense to me... So you're always setting panic_on_oops? -Andi - 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