Re: [PATCH] arch: configuration, deleting 'CONFIG_BUG' since always need it.

Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-05-23T12:50:33Z

On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 02:09:02PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Thursday 23 May 2013, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > This is the problem you guys are missing - unreachable() means "we lose
> > control of the CPU at this point".
>
> I'm absolutely aware of this. Again, the current behaviour of doing nothing
> at all isn't very different from undefined behavior when you get when you
> get to the end of a function returning a pointer without a "return" statement,
> or when you return from a function that has determined that it is not safe
> to continue.

Running off the end of a function like that is a different kettle of fish.
The execution path is still as the compiler intends - what isn't is that
the data returned is likely to be random trash.

That's _quite_ different from the CPU starting to execute the contents
of a literal data pool.