linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] debug: Deprecate BUG_ON() use in new code, introduce CRASH

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

Date:	Mon, 8 Jun 2015 17:26:16 +0300
From:	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc:	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, lou_langholtz@...com,
	htejun@...il.com, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	holler@...oftware.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] debug: Deprecate BUG_ON() use in new code, introduce CRASH_ON()

Ingo Molnar wrote:

> These days a BUG_ON() is almost always fatal due to unreleased locks,
> plus we still don't print kernel crashes to the graphical console,
> so they are silent hard lockups in 99% of the cases.

Is it a regression?

I've just tested with "echo c >/proc/sysrq-trigger" and
kernel.panic_on_oops=1 and the box just hanged. But I clearly remember
it started to work at some point and it was a miracle. Recently a colleague
of mine show such graphical panic (most of it as always scrolled away BTW).

It's usual setup with i915 driver, X and fbconsole which is never used.

As for BUG_ON() I hope rule will be relaxed for "not under locks" situations
and something will be done with inevitable miryads of trivial patches.

Count them:

        $ chgrep -e BUG_ON -w -n  | wc -l
        9660
--
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/