linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] net: xfrm_user: use BUG_ON instead of if condition followed by BUG

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: <20171024.174722.1655125725592115397.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:   Tue, 24 Oct 2017 17:47:22 +0900 (KST)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     herbert@...dor.apana.org.au
Cc:     garsilva@...eddedor.com, steffen.klassert@...unet.com,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: xfrm_user: use BUG_ON instead of if condition
 followed by BUG

From: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2017 11:25:08 +0800

> On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 01:18:57PM -0500, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
>> Use BUG_ON instead of if condition followed by BUG.
>> 
>> This issue was detected with the help of Coccinelle.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <garsilva@...eddedor.com>
> 
> I think this patch is terrible.  Why on earth is Coccinelle even
> warning about this?

BUG_ON(x) generates significantly better code than
"if (cond) BUG();" because it's not possible to emit
the most optimal code sequences like on powerpc that has
conditional traps.

That's why.

I'm applying these transformations all over the networking as I
receive them and I advise that you do so for crypto as well.

Thank.