linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] init: Do not warn on non-zero initcall return

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]

Message-ID: <CAMuHMdXguZknoR=A6Cpqoz4VYX6wuPtUWfV4yGhkBiGMQOdaYg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 2 May 2013 09:43:27 +0200
From:	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] init: Do not warn on non-zero initcall return

On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 7:35 PM, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
> Commit f91eb62f71 "init: scream bloody murder if interrupts are enabled
> too early" added three new warnings. The first two seemed reasonable,
> but the third included a warning when an initcall returned non-zero.
> Although, the third WARN() does include an imbalanced preempt disabled,
> or irqs disable, it shouldn't warn if it only had an initcall that just
> returns non-zero.
>
> In fact, according to Linus, it shouldn't print at all. As it only
> prints with initcall_debug set, and that already shows enough
> information to fix things.
>
> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/CA+55aFzaBC5SFi7=F2mfm+KWY5qTsBmOqgbbs8E+LUS8JK-sBg@mail.gmail.com
>
> Suggested-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
> Reported-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
> Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
>
> diff --git a/init/main.c b/init/main.c
> index bea1287..ceed17a 100644
> --- a/init/main.c
> +++ b/init/main.c
> @@ -686,11 +686,8 @@ int __init_or_module do_one_initcall(initcall_t fn)
>
>         msgbuf[0] = 0;
>
> -       if (ret && ret != -ENODEV && initcall_debug)
> -               sprintf(msgbuf, "error code %d ", ret);
> -
>         if (preempt_count() != count) {
> -               strlcat(msgbuf, "preemption imbalance ", sizeof(msgbuf));
> +               sprintf(msgbuf, "preemption imbalance ");

snprintf(), please?

JFYI, the v3.9 version already used up all of msgbuf[] in the
worst-case scenario,
and it did have the strlcat() as a parachute:

$ echo -n "error code 1234567890 preemption imbalance disabled
interrupts " | wc -c
63
$

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds
--
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/