On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 14:59:46 -0600
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net> wrote:

quoted text
> On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 13:33:47 -0700
> Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> 
> > > +	VM_BUG_ON(cc == NULL);  
> > 
> > It's a bit strange to test this when we're about to oops anyway.  The
> > oops will tell us the same thing.
> 
> ...except that we've seen a fair number of null pointer dereference
> exploits that have told us something altogether different.  Are we
> *sure* we don't want to test for null pointers...?
> 

It's hard to see what the test gains us really - the kernel has
zillions of pointer derefs, any of which could be NULL if we have a
bug.  Are we more likely to have a bug here than elsewhere?

This one will oops on a plain old read, so it's a bit moot in this
case.
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/