[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFwdNjPWyp2OHCOuVncrgy=9PZR2QBm3o5SrAHgRoWBXYw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2016 10:21:33 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>,
Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Antonio SJ Musumeci <trapexit@...wn.link>,
Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: BUG_ON() in workingset_node_shadows_dec() triggers
On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 10:16 AM, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
>
> Regardless, I still think that we can't let BUG continue kernel
> execution though, since it may lead to entirely unexpected behavior
> (possibly security-sensitive) by still running. Upgrading BUG to
> panic(), though, I'd be fine with, as a way to get people to convert
> to WARN.
No. Really. You can upgrade BUG() to "panic()" with a kernel command
line. But not by default.
I'm not going to take any patches that make BUG() even *worse*. That
would be insane. I'm not insane.
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists