linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/8] block/genhd.c: Add error handling

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: <5641674A.6080707@kernel.dk>
Date:	Mon, 9 Nov 2015 20:40:58 -0700
From:	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>,
	Vishnu Pratap Singh <vishnu.ps@...sung.com>
Cc:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	jmoyer@...hat.com, minchan@...nel.org, ngupta@...are.org,
	sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com, davem@...emloft.net,
	neilb@...e.com, ulf.hansson@...aro.org, tiwai@...e.de,
	hare@...e.de, ming.lei@...onical.com, jarod@...hat.com,
	tj@...nel.org, adrian.hunter@...el.com, jonathanh@...dia.com,
	grundler@...omium.org, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-raid@...r.kernel.org, linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org,
	cpgs@...sung.com, vishu13285@...il.com, pintu.k@...sung.com,
	rohit.kr@...sung.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] block/genhd.c: Add error handling

On 11/09/2015 08:33 PM, Al Viro wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 06, 2015 at 05:52:08PM +0530, Vishnu Pratap Singh wrote:
>
> Have you even tried to trigger the failure exits you've added?  The
> more you've successfully set up, the _less_ your cleanup code ends
> up undoing; that simply can't be right.
>
> That aside, as soon as we'd done register_disk(), the damn thing is
> available for open(), so bailing out is _really_ not something for
> faint-hearted - it's essentially equivalent to removal of device under
> somebody who'd opened it and might've started IO, etc.  Going there
> simply because some sysfs shite didn't get created doesn't look sane
> as far as I'm concerned...
>
> Especially since these failure exits are not going to be tested on
> a regular basis, so the amount of bitrot will be pretty high ;-/

I'd greatly prefer it we just leave it alone. Much better to have a disk 
that does actually work and with some sysfs spew in the logs, than bail 
out for fairly vague reasons.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions. It's a noble thought to 
want to clean this up, but I think it does more harm than good.

-- 
Jens Axboe

--
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/