linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Whine about suspicious return values from module's ->init() hook

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: <200802060948.11133.rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Date:	Wed, 6 Feb 2008 09:48:10 +1100
From:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...ru>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Whine about suspicious return values from module's ->init() hook

On Tuesday 05 February 2008 17:24:57 Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Feb 2008 17:08:37 +1100 Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au> 
wrote:
> > On Tuesday 05 February 2008 14:53:18 Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > That risks killing previously-working setups.  WARN_ON is sufficient.
> >
> > I disagree.  WARN_ON is useful for developers, but they can handle
> > BUG_ON, too.
>
> For developers, BUG_ON has zero benefit relative to WARN_ON.
>
> For non-developers, BUG_ON has large disadvantages relative to WARN_ON.
>
> It's a no-brainer.

For non-developers, WARN_ON is a noop.

For developers, WARN_ON is often a noop.

BUG_ON() will make us fix it in return for short-term pain.  WARN_ON() wont, 
in return for less pain.  It's mildly better than nothing, but not worth the 
patch.

Rusty.
--
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/