linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 05/10] blktrace: upgrade warns to 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: <20200420192009.073a1cec@oasis.local.home>
Date:   Mon, 20 Apr 2020 19:20:09 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
Cc:     Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>, axboe@...nel.dk,
        viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
        mingo@...hat.com, jack@...e.cz, ming.lei@...hat.com,
        nstange@...e.de, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mhocko@...e.com,
        yukuai3@...wei.com, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 05/10] blktrace: upgrade warns to BUG_ON() on
 unexpected circmunstances

On Sun, 19 Apr 2020 23:07:30 +0000
Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org> wrote:

> On Sun, Apr 19, 2020 at 03:50:13PM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > On 4/19/20 12:45 PM, Luis Chamberlain wrote:  
> > > @@ -498,10 +498,7 @@ static struct dentry *blk_trace_debugfs_dir(struct blk_user_trace_setup *buts,
> > >   	struct dentry *dir = NULL;
> > >   	/* This can only happen if we have a bug on our lower layers */
> > > -	if (!q->kobj.parent) {
> > > -		pr_warn("%s: request_queue parent is gone\n", buts->name);
> > > -		return NULL;
> > > -	}
> > > +	BUG_ON(!q->kobj.parent);  
> > 
> > Does the following quote from Linus also apply to this patch: "there is NO
> > F*CKING EXCUSE to knowingly kill the kernel." See also
> > https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/10/4/1.  
> 
> We can use WARN_ON() and keep the return NULL, sure.
> 

Yes please. This is definitely not something that should kill the system.

-- Steve