On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 01:08:40PM -0700, Dawson Engler wrote:
> Here are *uninspected* 2.4.5-ac4 results of a checker that warns when a
> non-__init function calls an __init function (suggested by
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]). There seem to be two cases:
>
> 1. The best case: the caller should actually be an __init function
> as well. This is a performance bug since it won't be freed.
>
> 2. The worst case: some random post-initialization routine
> calls an __init routine which can cause the kernel to go into
> hyperspace if the __init routine's code has been deleted.
>
> The current messages do not differentiate between these two cases. If these
> results are generally useful, I can fix up the checker, but as it now stands
> there shouldn't be that many false positives.
>
> Dawson
> MC linux bug database: http://hands.stanford.edu/linux
>
>
>/u2/engler/mc/oses/linux/2.4.5-ac4/net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_nat_standalone.c:278:init_or_cleanup:
> ERROR:INIT: non-init fn 'init_or_cleanup' calling init fn 'ip_nat_rule_init'
This is not a bug. init_or_cleanup is only called from one place with
an argument of 1: from the init() function. If the argument is 0,
as called by the exit() function, the code for calling the ip_nat_rule_setup
is never reached.
So it is definitely not a bug.
Anyway, one should maybe make this a little bit cleaner. Will look into that.
--
Live long and prosper
- Harald Welte / [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gnumonks.org/
============================================================================
GCS/E/IT d- s-: a-- C+++ UL++++$ P+++ L++++$ E--- W- N++ o? K- w--- O- M-
V-- PS+ PE-- Y+ PGP++ t++ 5-- !X !R tv-- b+++ DI? !D G+ e* h+ r% y+(*)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
