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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2020 17:53:36 +0100 From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org> To: Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com> Cc: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>, Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, "Weiny, Ira" <ira.weiny@...el.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [GIT] Networking Hi Doug et al, On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 5:36 PM Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com> wrote: > > On Feb 24, 2020, at 11:33 AM, Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org> wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 01:47:32PM +0100, Greg KH wrote: > >> On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 11:01:09AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > >>> On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 1:38 AM Linus Torvalds > >>> <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote: > >>>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 6:39 AM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote: > >>>>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/davem/net-next.git master > >>>> > >>>> On the *other* side of the same conflict, I find an even more > >>>> offensive commit, namely commit 4cd7c9479aff ("IB/mad: Add support for > >>>> additional MAD info to/from drivers") which adds a BUG_ON() for a > >>>> sanity check, rather than just returning -EINVAL or something sane > >>>> like that. > >>>> > >>>> I'm getting *real* tired of that BUG_ON() shit. I realize that > >>>> infiniband is a niche market, and those "commercial grade" niche > >>>> markets are more-than-used-to crap code and horrible hacks, but this > >>>> is still the kernel. We don't add random machine-killing debug checks > >>>> when it is *so* simple to just do > >>>> > >>>> if (WARN_ON_ONCE(..)) > >>>> return -EINVAL; > >>>> > >>>> instead. > >>> > >>> And if we follow that advice, friendly Greg will respond with: > >>> "We really do not want WARN_ON() anywhere, as that causes systems with > >>> panic-on-warn to reboot." > >>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20191121135743.GA552517@kroah.com/ > >> > >> Yes, we should not have any WARN_ON calls for something that userspace > >> can trigger, because then syzbot will trigger it and we will get an > >> annoying report saying to fix it :) > > > > Impressive backlog :) > > Geert, you replied on original discussion from 2015. Oops. I was looking up a recent net commit that was part of Dave's last pull request, couldn't find what I was looking for, and must have suddenly ended up in the email for an old pull request instead (they're all called "[GIT] Networking")... > Yeah, that threw me for a loop too ;-). Took several double takes on that one just to make sure none of the IB comments from Linus were related to anything current! Sorry for that. I hope I didn't cause any lost heartbeats. Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds
Powered by blists - more mailing lists