linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] [v2] arm64: define BUG() instruction without CONFIG

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: <20170321115156.GB12766@arm.com>
Date:   Tue, 21 Mar 2017 11:51:57 +0000
From:   Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:     Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [v2] arm64: define BUG() instruction without CONFIG_BUG

On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 11:35:16AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 8:09 PM, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com> wrote:
> 
> >>
> >> -#define BUG() do {                           \
> >> -     _BUG_FLAGS(0);                          \
> >> -     unreachable();                          \
> >> +#define _BUG_FLAGS(flags) __BUG_FLAGS(flags)
> >
> > What is this for? I don't see _BUG_FLAGS used anywhere, but I could
> > be missing some macro expansion.
> 
> I think I accidentally left this after removing the last user from an
> intermediate
> version of the patch. Do you want me to send an updated version, or could
> you just drop this line when applying?

I suspect Catalin can do that when he takes the patch. With that fixup:

Acked-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>

Thanks,

Will