linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] Stop some of the abuse of BUG() where compile time checks should be used.

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CA+55aFw-yu0-RXB9wK=qxCnToNBKAZc4jThDLumc+bEOdxBVow@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 22 Nov 2011 09:13:13 -0800
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	DM <dm.n9107@...il.com>
Cc:	David Daney <ddaney.cavm@...il.com>, ralf@...ux-mips.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
	David Daney <david.daney@...ium.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Stop some of the abuse of BUG() where compile time
 checks should be used.

On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 12:42 AM, DM <dm.n9107@...il.com> wrote:
>
> Perhaps BUILD_BUG() is a more consistent name for this?
>
> We would then have BUG() and BUG_ON(x) for run-time vs BUILD_BUG() and BUILD_BUG_ON(x) for compile-time.

Yeah, that probably would be nicer naming. The "BUILD_BUG_ON_USED()"
is kind of about the implementation, not the intention of the thing.

                  Linus
--
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/