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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CAMRc=MfFRZJUT_Cq=x73gj71x2PFFrV1x9GL+PiEOX_KxQZkiQ@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2023 19:50:16 +0100 From: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl> To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>, Kent Gibson <warthog618@...il.com>, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] gpiolib: remove extra_checks On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 5:13 PM Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 02:00:39PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 1:52 PM Andy Shevchenko > > <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 10:26:03AM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > > > > On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 4:28 PM Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org> wrote: > > ... > > > > > Defining DEBUG makes sense to > > > > enable dev_dbg() messages. > > > > > > Exactly! > > > > > > > CONFIG_DEBUG_GPIO is used by one driver > > > > > > By all drivers which are using pr_debug() / dev_dbg(). > > > I am using it a lot in my development process (actually I have it enabled > > > in all my kernel configurations). > > > > I'm not saying we should remove it. It'll stay defined in the Makefile > > and remain seamless for debug messages. I just want to get rid of that > > ugly extra_checks variable which has very little impact. > > I agree that extra_checks is unusual (or as Linus put it "non-standard") > thingy. And I agree that removal is for good. > > My question here solely about that WARN_ON(). Do we need it always be enabled > or not? > I think it makes sense. If you're freeing a non-requested descriptor then you clearly are doing something wrong and the system should yell. Bart > > > > to enable code that can lead to undefined behavior (should it maybe be > > > > #if 0?). > > > > > > I don't know what you are talking about here. > > > > I'm talking about drivers/gpio/gpio-tps65219.c and its usage of > > CONFIG_DEBUG_GPIO. > > Oh, that one should probably be > > #if 0 > ... > #endif > > or > > if (0) { > ... > } > > -- > With Best Regards, > Andy Shevchenko > >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists