netdev - Re: [patch net-next v2 4/6] mlxsw: core: Implement temperature hwmon interface

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: <20151202223531.GQ2355@nanopsycho.orion>
Date:	Wed, 2 Dec 2015 23:35:31 +0100
From:	Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	gerlitz.or@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch net-next v2 4/6] mlxsw: core: Implement temperature hwmon
 interface

Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 11:28:47PM CET, davem@...emloft.net wrote:
>From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
>Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 23:25:52 +0100
>
>> Again, there is no possible way to achieve this bugon, other than a
>> stack corruption. I don't think we should try to cope with a stack
>> corruption.
>
>Then remove the assertion.

I thought that in cases like this it is better to just assert and tell
user that something went horribly and non-recoverably wrong.

Why to continue to work if we know that we are making things wrong
(incorrect structure initialization in this case) ? What am I missing?
--
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