Re: [PATCH] kernel: kallsyms: parameters checking, for EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL functions

From: Rusty Russell
Date: Thu Apr 11 2013 - 00:01:07 EST

Chen Gang <gang.chen@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On 2013å04æ10æ 14:57, Rusty Russell wrote:
>> Chen Gang <gang.chen@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>> > for EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL functions, necessary to check their parameters.
>>> >
>>> > Signed-off-by: Chen Gang <gang.chen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Why?
>> If someone misuses these functions, they crash and thus indicate that
>> the caller shouldn't do that.
> for me, I think:
> if it is used by self (such as static functions):
> I prefer to crash immediatly.
> it will help us to find issue, quickly.
> if it can be used by others (such as EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL):
> I prefer to return fail and tell caller that parameter is invalid.
> it is more polite to callers, and still indicate it may be an issue.
> :-)

I disagree. Calling with invalid parameters is a bug. You've just
covered up some cases of invalid use and made it less likely to be
found. Because the caller won't notice they screwed up.

We could sprinkle WARN_ON() everywhere, but I prefer the crash. Even
harder to ignore.

There's no limit to how many of these checks we could put in, and we can
*never* take them out. I don't want to code that way.

>> Or is someone already doing this?
> really has:
> kernel: __wake_up_sync_key in kernel/sched/core.c.
> lib: *printf.
> mm: kfree.

No, I mean "is someone calling these functions with NULL".

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at