From: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linaro.org>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: dmapool: Check the dma pool name
Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 10:34:44 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAMz4kuLG7c9E98q_SwYT+wcKRjH3RHL9p85D1Ku+FAAvLL1T-Q@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180530154110.GA22184@bombadil.infradead.org>
On 30 May 2018 at 23:41, Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> wrote:
> On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 08:13:27AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>> On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 08:14:09PM +0800, Baolin Wang wrote:
>> > On 30 May 2018 at 20:01, Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> wrote:
>> > > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 07:28:43PM +0800, Baolin Wang wrote:
>> > >> It will be crash if we pass one NULL name when creating one dma pool,
>> > >> so we should check the passing name when copy it to dma pool.
>> > >
>> > > NAK. Crashing is the appropriate thing to do. Fix the caller to not
>> > > pass NULL.
>> > >
>> > > If you permit NULL to be passed then you're inviting crashes or just
>> > > bad reporting later when pool->name is printed.
>> >
>> > I think it just prints one NULL pool name. Sometimes the device
>> > doesn't care the dma pool names, so I think we can make code more
>> > solid to valid the passing parameters like other code does.
>> > Or can we add check to return NULL when the passing name is NULL
>> > instead of crashing the kernel? Thanks.
>>
>> No. Fix your driver.
>
> Let me elaborate on this. Kernel code is supposed to be "reasonable".
> That means we don't check every argument to every function for sanity,
> unless it's going to cause trouble later. Crashing immediately with
> a bogus argument is fine; you can see the problem and fix it immediately.
> Returning NULL with a bad argument is actually worse; you won't know why
> the function returned NULL (maybe we're out of memory?) and you'll have
> a more complex debugging experience.
>
> Sometimes it makes sense to accept a NULL pointer and do something
> reasonable, like kfree(). In this case, we can eliminate checks in all
> the callers. But we don't, in general, put sanity checks on arguments
> without a good reason.
>
> Your reasons aren't good. "The driver doesn't care" -- well, just pass
> the driver's name, then.
Thanks for your explanation. OK, force the driver to pass a pool name.
Sorry for noises.
--
Baolin.wang
Best Regards
prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-05-31 2:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-05-30 11:28 Baolin Wang
2018-05-30 12:01 ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-05-30 12:14 ` Baolin Wang
2018-05-30 15:13 ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-05-30 15:41 ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-05-31 2:34 ` Baolin Wang [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAMz4kuLG7c9E98q_SwYT+wcKRjH3RHL9p85D1Ku+FAAvLL1T-Q@mail.gmail.com \
--to=baolin.wang@linaro.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox