Re: [RFC PATCH 03/13] usb: remove the usage of the list iterator after the loop

[Linus Torvalds]

On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 5:50 AM Miguel Ojeda
<miguel.ojeda.sandonis@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> But making it non-UB in the standard does not force a project to
> consider it "not an error", which is what actually matters for being
> able to use UBSan effectively or not.

Absolutely.

I think people should treat UBsan and friends a bit like "runtime lint".

"lint" traditionally doesn't necessarily check for just *incorrect* C.

It checks for things that can be confusing to humans, even if they are
100% completely conforming standard C.

Classic example: indentation. Having the wrong indentation is not in
any shape of form "undefined behavior" from a C standpoint, but it
sure is something that makes sense checking for anyway.

I think "integer overflow" should be considered the exact same thing.
It should *not* be treated as "undefined behavior", and it should not
give the compiler the option to generate code that doesn't match what
the programmer wrote.

But having a checking tool that says "This looks wrong - you just had
an integer overflow"? THAT makes 100% sense.

The C standard rules "undefined behavior" really is a problem in the standard.

                     Linus