[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <19f34abd0808281359p6ee01393x209f2bf2de3918af@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2008 22:59:59 +0200
From: "Vegard Nossum" <vegard.nossum@...il.com>
To: "Adrian Bunk" <bunk@...nel.org>
Cc: "Pekka Enberg" <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
"Alexey Dobriyan" <adobriyan@...il.com>,
"David Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] bitfields API
On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 10:27 PM, Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 09:40:47PM +0300, Pekka Enberg wrote:
>> Hi Alexey,
>>
>> Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
>>> On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 08:32:23PM +0200, Vegard Nossum wrote:
>>>> How do you feel about this patch? It's all about making kmemcheck more
>>>> useful... and not much else. Does it have any chance of entering the
>>>> kernel along with kmemcheck (when/if that happens)?
>>>
>>> DEFINE_BITFIELD is horrible.
>>
>> Heh, heh, one alternative is to have a kmemcheck_memset() thingy that
>> unconditionally zeroes bit fields and maybe is a no-op when kmemcheck is
>> disabled.
>
> This sounds as if this might cause bugs to disappear when debugging gets
> turned on?
>
> Or do I miss anything?
You are correct :-)
Almost all the possible solutions (at least the feasible ones) are
trade-offs between false-positives and false-negatives.
So here we are trading a bunch of false-positive errors (a couple of
thousand for transferring a 1M file over ssh :-)) for detecting any
code that uses an uninitialized flag in struct skbuff. So in this case
it is more useful to hide reports about this single bit-field.
Vegard
--
"The animistic metaphor of the bug that maliciously sneaked in while
the programmer was not looking is intellectually dishonest as it
disguises that the error is the programmer's own creation."
-- E. W. Dijkstra, EWD1036
--
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