From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755312AbaKPLsw (ORCPT ); Sun, 16 Nov 2014 06:48:52 -0500 Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.15.4]:54382 "EHLO mout.web.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755005AbaKPLsv (ORCPT ); Sun, 16 Nov 2014 06:48:51 -0500 Message-ID: <54688F15.9070703@users.sourceforge.net> Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2014 12:48:37 +0100 From: SF Markus Elfring User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dan Carpenter CC: Eric Paris , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, trivial@kernel.org, Coccinelle Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] kernel-audit: Deletion of an unnecessary check before the function call "audit_log_end" References: <530CD2C4.4050903@users.sourceforge.net> <530CF8FF.8080600@users.sourceforge.net> <530DD06F.4090703@users.sourceforge.net> <5317A59D.4@users.sourceforge.net> <54687F1A.1010809@users.sourceforge.net> <20141116111023.GA4905@mwanda> <20141116111446.GA4956@mwanda> In-Reply-To: <20141116111446.GA4956@mwanda> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:OrrsUlRAqO+QXoId7/ZPaL8nw23T5aeGBJHdzZyaC5YeHWQimP9 t058VMLFyD3bcRo6dL/Vy4MB56ieiMzIa2WUXhaz8EFt2dXXmNXyaEgLTjmsCH9oXaPp00E jQzyDeQKdLgyxyKuNg8HwYRHoNsIgKlGXVxpXSdwM7xdn+ff5CBvNx76e3EKvprb9ArJ2Qn F/sWDj18coIedbzbPjlGw== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1; Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > An example of a bug introduced is here: > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/11/3/505 It seems that we try to clarify a different interpretation of "bugs", don't we? It is an usual software development challenge to decide on the best source code places where to put input parameter validation (and when it can be omitted), isn't it? Regards, Markus