lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Aug]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v4 2/2] staging: android: Remove BUG from ion_system_heap.c
On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 09:25:26AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On 8/21/20 8:28 AM, Tomer Samara wrote:
> > Remove BUG() from ion_sytem_heap.c
> >
> > this fix the following checkpatch issue:
> > Avoid crashing the kernel - try using WARN_ON &
> > recovery code ratherthan BUG() or BUG_ON().
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Tomer Samara <tomersamara98@gmail.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/staging/android/ion/ion_system_heap.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/android/ion/ion_system_heap.c b/drivers/staging/android/ion/ion_system_heap.c
> > index eac0632ab4e8..00d6154aec34 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/android/ion/ion_system_heap.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/android/ion/ion_system_heap.c
> > @@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ static int order_to_index(unsigned int order)
> > for (i = 0; i < NUM_ORDERS; i++)
> > if (order == orders[i])
> > return i;
> > - BUG();
> > + /* This is impossible. */
> > return -1;
> > }
>
> Hi,
> Please explain why this is impossible.
>
> If some caller calls order_to_index(5), it will return -1, yes?
>
> --
> ~Randy
>

As Dan Carpenter says here https://lkml.kernel.org/lkml/cover.1597865771.git.tomersamara98@gmail.com/T/#mc790b91029565b1bb0cb87997b39007d9edb6e04.
After looking at callers we see that order_to_index called from 2 functions:
- alloc_buffer_page called from alloc_largest_available which
loop over all legit order nubmers
( Flow:
alloc_largest_available-->alloc_buffer_page-->order_to_index
)

- free_buffer_page takes the order using compound_order, which return 0 or
the order number for the page, this function has 2 callers too,
ion_system_heap_allocate (which called it in case of failure at sg_alloc_table,
thus calling from this flow will no casue error) and ion_system_heap_free
(which will be called on every sg table in the buffer that allocated good,
meaning from this flow also error will not be created).
( Flows:
ion_system_heap_free --> free_buffer_page --> order_to_index
ion_system_heap_allocate --> free_buffer_page --> order_to_index
)

Of course if some user will use this function with wrong order number he will be able to get this -1.
So should I remove this comment and resotre the error checks?
Btw, this is the same reason that I dropped the error check at ion_page_pool_shrink, so should I restore here also?

Thanks,
Tomer Samara

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-08-22 11:35    [W:0.096 / U:3.280 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site