| 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: <87mx0c92s0.fsf@nemi.mork.no> Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 18:17:51 +0200 From: Bjørn Mork <bjorn@...k.no> To: Steve Glendinning <steve@...well.net> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] smsc95xx: enable power saving mode during system suspend Steve Glendinning <steve@...well.net> writes: >>> I hadn't thought that was a situation that could arise, is it? Would >>> this happen if the USB device was removed during suspend? >> >> No, it should not happen. But then, why test at all? > > I thought it was common practice to add these tests to document an > assumption the developer made that later code relies on? I had > assumed that the !dev condition should not be possible, hence the > simple BUG test. If it is possible then I agree - I definitely need > to handle this more gracefully. > > In this case, asserting that dev is not NULL will make the code fail > loudly there instead of a few lines down when the netdev_info call > dereferences dev->net. Either way something bad will happen! Yes, but you are a lot less likely to know about it if you BUG out. The user will be left with no other choice than hitting reset or poweroff. What's the point of that? If your driver crashes but the machine is left running, then the user may forward the Oops to you. That's much more useful. Bjørn -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists