linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] kernel/params.c: make use of unused but set variable

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]

Date:	Fri, 12 Jun 2015 10:48:31 +0900
From:	Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
To:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Louis Langholtz <lou_langholtz@...com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	trivial@...nel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kernel/params.c: make use of unused but set variable

On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 10:57:24AM +0930, Rusty Russell wrote:
> Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> writes:
> > On Sun, Jun 7, 2015 at 5:00 PM, Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com> wrote:
> > At most, it could be a "WARN_ON_ONCE()". Maybe even just silently
> > ignore the error. But BUG_ON()? Hell no.
> 
> Yeah, in practice it's already (1) paniced if we ran out of memory, or
> (2) warned if we somehow tried to create two entries with the same name.
> 
> So the WARN_ON_ONCE() is a bit... meh.  How's this, too snarky?

Sounds pretty passive agressive to me.  At least reply to the actual
argument?

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/