| 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: Sun, 3 Jun 2007 11:27:31 -0500 From: Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com> To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> Cc: Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de>, Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>, Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com> Subject: Re: Conditionals for development tests and output On Sat, Jun 02, 2007 at 10:48:21AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Sat, 2 Jun 2007 16:43:48 +0200 Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de> wrote: > > > And your approach could easily result in code paths never tested in > > -mm or -rc kernels exploding in the actual release. > > yep, we need to ensure that DEVELKERNEL gets turned off a few weeks > before final release. I'm not very keen on this whole idea. It's a fairly well-known phenomenon that behavior can change for the worse when you turn off debug flags for a variety of reasons. So instituting a monoculture where -everyone- has a global debug flag on then turns it off is a little worrisome. When we're talking about a single warning, it's probably not a big deal, but once we expand the usage to cover a dozen or a hundred things, the odds that we'll hide a race or side-effect somewhere increase. -- Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time. - 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