linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 02/26] block: Add bio

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20120920232506.GI7264@google.com>
Date:	Thu, 20 Sep 2012 16:25:06 -0700
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Kent Overstreet <koverstreet@...gle.com>
Cc:	linux-bcache@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	dm-devel@...hat.com, axboe@...nel.dk, neilb@...e.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 02/26] block: Add bio_advance()

Hello,

On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 04:13:08PM -0700, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> I just cut and pasted that from blk_update_request(), which is what the
> next patch refactors...

Yeah, well, that was written when we didn't have WARNs.

> But yes it would be a bug. It gets converted to a BUG_ON() in a later
> patch (not in this series), as this gets further abstracted into a
> wrapper around bvec_advance_iter() which doesn't know about struct bio
> (as bio integrity gets its own iterator).

WARN() generally preferable unless there's no way at all to continue.
Storage layer could be a bit different if immediate danger for data
corruption exists but the general consensus seems that we're too
trigger happy with BUG_ON()s.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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/