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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 20:57:37 +0800 From: Wang Weidong <weidong1991.wang@...il.com> To: Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>, Wang Weidong <wangweidong1@...wei.com> CC: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] 8139cp: remove a won't occurred BUG_ON From: Wang Weidong <wangweidong1@...wei.com> On 2014/1/27 19:54, Ben Hutchings wrote: > On Mon, 2014-01-27 at 09:14 +0800, Wang Weidong wrote: >> On 2014/1/27 7:23, Ben Hutchings wrote: >>> On Sun, 2014-01-26 at 16:33 +0800, Wang Weidong wrote: >>>> when variable i go to the BUG_ON the value is equal to the CP_NUM_STATS, >>>> so the BUG_ON won't occur, so remove it >>> >>> We hope that every BUG_ON() does not occur, but that doesn't mean they >>> should be removed. This check is meant to catch mistakes when adding >>> new statistics. >>> >>> Ben. >>> >> Hi, Ben. >> >> Yeah, but I think If someone would add new statistics, he should take into account >> it instead the BUG_ON helper. >> >> And that, I found some other drivers' get_ethtool_stats no have BUG_ON. Should we >> add the BUG_ON into them? > [...] > > The important thing is that the get_stats, get_sset_count and > get_strings operations are consistent. Depending on how they are > implemented, a BUG_ON or BUILD_BUG_ON may be useful to check that. I > don't think there's any universal best practice. > > Ben. > Ok, Got it. Thanks for your answers. Regards, Wang -- 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