Re: [patch] sunrpc: add missing return statement

[Tetsuo Handa]

Trond Myklebust wrote:
> > > No. It should either be a BUG_ON(), or else be removed entirely.
> > > Returning an error value for something that is clearly a programming bug
> > > is not a particularly useful exercise...
> > > 
> > Removing NULL check is wrong because it will NULL pointer dereference later.
> 
> Wrong. Removing NULL check is _right_ because calling this function
> without setting up a back channel first is a major BUG. Returning an
> error value to the user is pointless, since the user has no control over
> this. It is entirely under control of the sunrpc developers...
> 
For security people, removing

	if (!args->bc_xprt)
		ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);

is worse and changing to

	BUG_ON(!args->bc_xprt);

is better.
--
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/