Re: [PATCH] rxrpc: recvmsg: use BUG_ON instead of if condition followed by BUG

[Gustavo A. R. Silva]

Hi Tom,

Quoting Tom Herbert <tom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:

> Please combine these related patches fixing BUG in rxrpc into a patch
> set with proper annotation,

I can do that.

> Also, can any of these BUG_ONs be replaced by WARN_ONs? Warnings are
> generally preferable to crashing the system.

What about WARN_ON_ONCE instead?

Thanks
--
Gustavo A. R. Silva

> Tom
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 9:20 AM, Gustavo A. R. Silva
> <garsilva@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Use BUG_ON instead of if condition followed by BUG.
> >
> > This issue was detected with the help of Coccinelle.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <garsilva@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  net/rxrpc/recvmsg.c | 6 ++----
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/net/rxrpc/recvmsg.c b/net/rxrpc/recvmsg.c
> > index bdece21..9598b92 100644
> > --- a/net/rxrpc/recvmsg.c
> > +++ b/net/rxrpc/recvmsg.c
> > @@ -243,8 +243,7 @@ static int rxrpc_verify_packet(struct  
> > rxrpc_call *call, struct sk_buff *skb,
> >          */
> >         if ((annotation & RXRPC_RX_ANNO_JUMBO) > 1) {
> >                 __be16 tmp;
> > -               if (skb_copy_bits(skb, offset - 2, &tmp, 2) < 0)
> > -                       BUG();
> > +               BUG_ON(skb_copy_bits(skb, offset - 2, &tmp, 2) < 0);
> >                 cksum = ntohs(tmp);
> >                 seq += (annotation & RXRPC_RX_ANNO_JUMBO) - 1;
> >         }
> > @@ -503,8 +502,7 @@ int rxrpc_recvmsg(struct socket *sock, struct  
> > msghdr *msg, size_t len,
> >
> >         release_sock(&rx->sk);
> >
> > -       if (test_bit(RXRPC_CALL_RELEASED, &call->flags))
> > -               BUG();
> > +       BUG_ON(test_bit(RXRPC_CALL_RELEASED, &call->flags));
> >
> >         if (test_bit(RXRPC_CALL_HAS_USERID, &call->flags)) {
> >                 if (flags & MSG_CMSG_COMPAT) {
> > --
> > 2.7.4