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

[Al Viro]

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.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/