linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 1/3] block: add rq->complete

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]

Date:	Mon, 3 Mar 2008 09:33:15 -0800
From:	"Grant Grundler" <grundler@...gle.com>
To:	"Hannes Reinecke" <hare@...e.de>
Cc:	"Kiyoshi Ueda" <k-ueda@...jp.nec.com>, jens.axboe@...cle.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
	dm-devel@...hat.com, j-nomura@...jp.nec.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/3] block: add rq->complete_io hook for request stacking

On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 8:24 AM, Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de> wrote:

>  I would rather have rq->complete_io() to be pointing to blk_end_io in the
>  default case, this way rq->complete_io() would always be valid and we
>  would be saving us the if() clause.

This is a good idea. But...

...
>  So when using my proposal this would just become:
>
>  {
>     BUG_ON(!rq->complete_io);
>
>     return rq->complete_io(rq, error, nr_bytes, 0, NULL);
>  }

This "BUG_ON" is also an "if()" clause except
it will panic. The box will panic if the function
pointer is a null pointer and it won't be hard to
sort out why. I suggest omitting the BUG_ON.

thanks,
grant
--
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/