From: Krzysztof Halasa <khc@pm.waw.pl>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
ak@suse.de, adaplas@gmail.com,
linux-fbdev-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
benh@kernel.crashing.org
Subject: Re: [git patches] two warning fixes
Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 15:38:46 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m3vecgbjix.fsf@maximus.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.0.999.0707181834070.27353@woody.linux-foundation.org> (Linus Torvalds's message of "Wed, 18 Jul 2007 18:37:53 -0700 (PDT)")
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> writes:
> So let's make a new rule:
>
> We absolutely NEVER add things like "must_check" unless not checking
> causes a real and obvious SECURITY ISSUE.
Oh, come on, almost every kernel bug is a potential security issue.
IMHO, if the function can only fail due to a kernel bug, it should
return void and, in case of bug, explode with BUG_ON() or something
like that. Sure, must_check doesn't apply too well to void.
But, if I have functions which can fail for legitimate (not kernel
bug) reasons, and I know ignoring their return values would always
be a bug, then must_check seems an obvious best and simple defense
against that.
--
Krzysztof Halasa
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-07-19 13:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-07-18 23:55 [git patches] two warning fixes Jeff Garzik
2007-07-18 23:59 ` Andi Kleen
2007-07-19 0:05 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-07-19 1:19 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-07-19 1:41 ` Andrew Morton
2007-07-19 1:50 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-07-19 2:05 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-07-19 2:36 ` Andrew Morton
2007-07-19 1:37 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-07-19 2:32 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-07-19 13:40 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2007-07-19 18:04 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-07-19 18:20 ` Stephen Hemminger
2007-07-20 18:34 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2007-07-21 0:32 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-07-22 4:03 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-07-22 21:29 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-07-23 3:26 ` Kyle Moffett
2007-07-19 13:38 ` Krzysztof Halasa [this message]
2007-07-19 18:00 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-07-20 12:54 ` Tim Tassonis
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=m3vecgbjix.fsf@maximus.localdomain \
--to=khc@pm.waw.pl \
--cc=adaplas@gmail.com \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=jeff@garzik.org \
--cc=linux-fbdev-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).