On Tue, 25 Sep 2018, Vladis Dronov wrote: > > What reason is there for having two different fixes for the same bug? > > This one isn't going to get into any mainline trees that don't already > > have c9a4cb204e9e. > > I believe this is the right thing to do, so usb_find_alt_setting() > is not called with a known-bad argument. > > Honestly, I would change "if (!config)" in usb_find_alt_setting() to > "BUG_ON(!config)" so we know when its callers do smth wrong and go (You'll be lucky if Linus doesn't see that. He yells at anybody who suggests adding BUG_ON for anything that doesn't completely crash the kernel. The basic problem is that "BUG_ON" is not a good name: That routine doesn't really report bugs; instead it brings everything to a halt in situations where the kernel is unable to proceed. In practice this tends to make actual debugging more difficult.) > fix callers. Unfortunately, I understand this hardly will be accepted. How is this different from calling kfree() with a NULL argument? Alan Stern
