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: <CANiq72m28WrjVHkcg5Y0LDa51Ur4OCpFbGdcq+v4gqiC0Wi6zg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sun, 27 Feb 2022 19:09:03 +0100
From:   Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
To:     Segher Boessenkool <segher@...nel.crashing.org>
Cc:     David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Jakob <jakobkoschel@...il.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
        "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@...eddedor.com>,
        Brian Johannesmeyer <bjohannesmeyer@...il.com>,
        Cristiano Giuffrida <c.giuffrida@...nl>,
        "Bos, H.J." <h.j.bos@...nl>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 03/13] usb: remove the usage of the list iterator
 after the loop

On Sun, Feb 27, 2022 at 1:09 PM Segher Boessenkool
<segher@...nel.crashing.org> wrote:
>
> How will you define dividing by zero so that its behaviour is reasonable
> for every program, for example?

The solution is to let the developer specify what they need to happen.
That choice should include the unsafe possibility (i.e. unchecked),
because sometimes that is precisely what we need.

> Invoking an error handler at runtime
> has most of the same unwanted effects, except is is never silent.  You

It may not be what it is needed in some cases (thus the necessity to
be able to choose), but at least one can predict what happens and
different compilers, versions, flags, inputs, etc. would agree.

Cheers,
Miguel

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ