Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964941AbcJGRVn (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Oct 2016 13:21:43 -0400 Received: from mail-oi0-f43.google.com ([209.85.218.43]:36420 "EHLO mail-oi0-f43.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S936228AbcJGRVf (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Oct 2016 13:21:35 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <20161005190604.GA8116@1wt.eu> <20161007054824.GA9917@1wt.eu> From: Linus Torvalds Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2016 10:21:33 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: B2soHbsB06FB-utun4yC9xp6zmg Message-ID: Subject: Re: BUG_ON() in workingset_node_shadows_dec() triggers To: Kees Cook Cc: Willy Tarreau , Paul Gortmaker , Johannes Weiner , Andrew Morton , Antonio SJ Musumeci , Miklos Szeredi , Linux Kernel Mailing List , stable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 581 Lines: 15 On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 10:16 AM, Kees Cook wrote: > > Regardless, I still think that we can't let BUG continue kernel > execution though, since it may lead to entirely unexpected behavior > (possibly security-sensitive) by still running. Upgrading BUG to > panic(), though, I'd be fine with, as a way to get people to convert > to WARN. No. Really. You can upgrade BUG() to "panic()" with a kernel command line. But not by default. I'm not going to take any patches that make BUG() even *worse*. That would be insane. I'm not insane. Linus