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]
Date:	Thu, 27 Feb 2014 16:16:45 -0800
From:	Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] bug: Make BUG() call unreachable()

On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 08:19:47PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wednesday 26 February 2014, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > This doesn't seem any different than compiling out assert() at runtime
> > in a userspace program, given how the kernel uses BUG() and BUG_ON().
> > I'd argue that adding unreachable() doesn't seem like it makes the
> > current implementation of BUG() any worse; either way if you reach it
> > you have a problem.
> 
> I think it's better to get a warning about undefined behavior than
> to suppress that warning.

Then at this point I'm going to suggest that you go ahead and submit the
patch you want on top of the first four patches of this series.  Please
keep in mind the value and code size savings of !CONFIG_BUG, versus
CONFIG_BUG=y and !CONFIG_DEBUG_BUGVERBOSE; those mean two different
things.

Meanwhile: Andrew, could you go ahead and apply the first four patches?

- Josh Triplett
--
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