Re: [PATCH -mm] sys_semctl gcc 4.1 warning fix

Al Viro
2006-05-10T21:39:44Z

On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 02:33:42PM -0700, Daniel Walker wrote:
> > Consider the following scenario:
> >
> > 1) gcc gives false positive
> > 2) tosser on a rampage "fixes" it
> > 3) code is chaged a month later
> > 4) a real bug is introduced - one that would be _really_ visible to gcc,
> > with "is used" in a warning
> > 5) thanks to aforementioned tosser, that bug remains hidden.
>
> I don't really see anything new here .. The same sort of stuff can
> happen in any code considered for inclusion .. That's what the review
> process is for .
>
> Real errors can be covered up any number of way ..

One last time: your kind of patches actually increases the odds of new bug
staying unnoticed.

If you really fill the urge to pull a Bunk, do it somewhere else, please -
the real thing is already more than sufficiently annoying.