linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 05/12] regmap: irq: Remove unreachable goto

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: <Z_akNogB_TkXcS37@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2025 19:45:42 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: Mathieu Dubois-Briand <mathieu.dubois-briand@...tlin.com>,
	Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
	Kamel Bouhara <kamel.bouhara@...tlin.com>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>,
	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
	Uwe Kleine-König <ukleinek@...nel.org>,
	Michael Walle <mwalle@...nel.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
	Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-input@...r.kernel.org, linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org,
	Grégory Clement <gregory.clement@...tlin.com>,
	Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 05/12] regmap: irq: Remove unreachable goto

On Wed, Apr 09, 2025 at 05:32:55PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 09, 2025 at 07:00:24PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 09, 2025 at 04:46:04PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> 
> > > unreachable() just annotates things, AFAICT it doesn't actually
> > > guarantee to do anything in particular if the annotation turns out to be
> > > incorrect.
> 
> > I;m not sure I follow. unreachable is a wrapper on top of
> > __builtin_unreachable() which is intrinsic of the compiler.
> 
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Other-Builtins.html#index-_005f_005fbuiltin_005funreachable
> 
> That just says that the program is undefined if we get to the
> __builtin_undefined() and documents some behaviour around warnings.  One
> example of undefined behaviour would be doing nothing.

Theoretically yes, practically return after a BUG() makes no sense. Note,
that compiler effectively removes 'goto exit;' here (that's also mentioned
in the documentation independently on the control flow behaviour), so
I don't know what you expect from it.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko