[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <492D6FB8.80401@panasas.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 17:48:08 +0200
From: Benny Halevy <bhalevy@...asas.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
CC: lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: WARN_ON out of range error in ERR_PTR?
Andrew,
After hitting a bug where an nfs error -10021 wasn't handled
correctly since IS_ERR returned false on its ERR_PTR value
I realized that adding a BUG_ON to make sure the mapped error
is in the valid range would have caught this.
Since ERR_PTR is not called on the critical path
(unlike IS_ERR) but rather on the error handling path I believe
we can tolerate the extra cost.
The reason this is just a WARN_ON and not BUG_ON is to make
fixing it easier, although I do consider calling ERR_PTR on an
out of range error a pretty dangerous bug as the error might go
unnoticed.
How about committing the following patch to -mm?
Signed-off-by: Benny Halevy <bhalevy@...asas.com>
---
include/linux/err.h | 3 ++-
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/err.h b/include/linux/err.h
index ec87f31..81df84f 100644
--- a/include/linux/err.h
+++ b/include/linux/err.h
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
#define _LINUX_ERR_H
#include <linux/compiler.h>
-
+#include <asm/bug.h>
#include <asm/errno.h>
/*
@@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
static inline void *ERR_PTR(long error)
{
+ WARN_ON(error && !IS_ERR_VALUE(error));
return (void *) error;
}
--
1.6.0.2
--
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