On Mon, 2007-09-24 at 17:59 -0700, Roland McGrath wrote: > > Yup, I think I ditched most of them.. for some reason I decided it > > couldn't happen, but maybe I'm wrong ? > > Well, it's a BUG_ON. It's supposed to be for something that "can't happen". > That's why it's a sanity check, not a wild assertion. ;-) > > The 2/2 patch is an example of a bug that CHECK_FULL_REGS catches. > In the status quo, using PTRACE_PEEKUSR in a bug case crashes while using > PTRACE_GETREGS in the same place might get bogus data. (In the actual bug > thus found, the data is not bogus and only the bit that FULL_REGS checks is.)
Fair enough. Ben. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
