Slashdot Mirror
Linux Kernel Code Humor
An anonymous reader writes "This article points to some pretty funny comments and code in the Linux kernel. From colorful metaphors, to burning printers, to happy meals... A recursive search through the entire code base reveals some interesting language. Is all code like this?"
Yes.
Haven't been working long in the real world, eh?
... hi bingo
The best code comment I heard about (in a discussion about code commenting, I believe) was something like this: /*** DRUNK -- FIX LATER! ***/
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
Something forms itself from the silent void of the empty mailing lists and the noisy chaos of the crowded mailing lists. It shapes and protects us, it entertains and challenges us, it aids us in our journey through the ether world of software. It is mysterious; it is at once source code and yet object code. I do not know the name, thus I will call it the Tao of Linux.
If the Tao is great, then the box is stable. If the box is stable, then the server is secure. If the server is secure, then the data is safe. If the data is safe, then the users are happy.
In the beginning there was chaos in Unix.
Tanenbaum gave birth to MINIX. MINIX did not have the Tao.
MINIX gave birth to Linux 0.1 and it had promise.
Linux gave birth to v1.3 and it was good.
v1.3 gave birth to v2.0 and it was better.
Linux has evolved greatly from its distant cousins of the old. Linux is embodied by the Tao.
The wise user is told about the Tao and contributes to it. The average user is told about the Tao and compiles it. The foolish user is told about the Tao and laughs and asks who needs it.
If it were not for laughter, there would be no Tao.
Wisdom leads to good code, but experience leads to good use of that code.
The master Cox once dreamed that he was a Kernel. When he awoke he exclaimed: "I don't know whether I am Cox dreaming that I am a Kernel, or a Kernel dreaming that I am Cox!"
The master Linus then said: "The Tao envelopes you. You shall create great code for Linux."
"On the contrary," said Cox, "The Tao has already created the code, I will only have to find it and write it down."
A master was explaining the nature of the Tao to one of his students:
"Is the Tao in the VM subsystem?" he asked. "Yes," replied the master.
"Is the Tao in the scheduler?" he queried again. "The Tao is in the scheduler."
"Is the Tao even in the modules?". "It is even in the modules," said the master.
"Is the Tao in the Low-Latency Patch?"
The master frowned and was silent for much time.
"You fail to understand the Tao. Go away."
The Tao is the yin and the yang. It is the good and the evil, it is everything and yet it is nothing, it is the beginning and the end.
The Tao was there at the kernel compile, and it will be there when the kernel panics.
A novice user once asked a master: "Why compile in C when C++ is more popular?"
"Why a monolythic kernel when Mach is more popular?"
"And why use ReiserFS when ext2 is more popular?"
The master sighed and replied: "Why run Unix when NT is more popular?"
The user was enlightened.
A frustrated user once asked a master: "My kernel has panicked, should I post to lkml?"
"No," replied the master, "You will only bother the Tao."
"Should I rm -rf?"
"No, you will have wasted the Tao's time."
"Well should I search the web?"
"You will search for all eternity," said the master.
"Perhaps I should try FreeBSD?"
"Then you will have disgraced the Tao."
"I suppose I could try gdb," said the user.
The master smiled and replied: "Then you will have made the Tao stronger."
A stubborn user once told a master: "I run version 2.2. I always have, and I always will."
The master replied: "You are foolish and do not understand the Tao. The Tao is dynamic and ever changing. Linux strives for the perfection that is the Tao. It flows from version to version with peace."
"So my Linux does not have the Tao, so what?" said the foolish user. "Oh your Linux is of the Tao," said the master. "However, the Tao of Linux follows the Tao of the C library. One day the C library will change, and your Linux will be left behind." The user was silent.
An angry user once yelled at a master:
"My Linux has panicked! What lousy software it is, I hate it so!"
"You are insulting the Tao," said the master. "The Tao is everywhere bringing order to hundreds of networks, aiding thousands of users, and fighting that of which we call the 'lame.' Do not disrespect the Tao; however, the Tao will forgive you."
"I apologize," said the user, "And I will be more forgiving the next time the Tao fails me."
"The Tao has not failed you, it is you that has failed the Tao," said the master. "The Tao is perfect."
The Tao decides if a kernel shall compile, or if it shall abort.
The Tao decides if a kernel shall boot, or if it shall freeze.
The Tao decides if a kernel shall run, or if it shall panic.
But, the Tao does not decide if a box will have no hardware failures. That is a mystery to everyone.
A young master once approached an old master: "I have a LUG for Linux help. But, I fail to answer my students' problems; they are above me."
The master replied: "Have you taught them of the Tao?" he asked. "How it brings together man and software, yet how it distances them apart; how if flows throughout Linux and transcends its essence?"
"No," exclaimed the apprentice, "These people cannot even get the source untarred."
"Oh, said the master, "In that case, tell them to RTFM."
A master watched as an ambitious user reconstructed his Linux.
"I shall make every bit encrypted," the user said. "I shall use 2048 bit keys, three different algorithms, and make multiple passes."
The master replied: "I think it is unwise."
"Why?" asked the user. "Will my encryption harm the mighty Tao, which gives Linux life and creates the balance between kernel and processes? The mighty Tao, which is the thread that binds the modules and links them with the core? The mighty Tao, which safely guides the TCP/IP packets to and from the network card?"
"No," said the master, "It will hog too much cpu."
The core is like the part of the mind that is static. It is programmed at a child's creation and cannot be changed unless a new child is made; unless a new kernel is compiled.
The modules are like the part of the mind that is dynamic. It is reprogrammed every time one learns new knowledge; every time one learns better code.
One is yin, the other yang. Each is nothing without the other.
A novice came to lkml and inquired to all the masters there: "I wish to become a master. Must I memorize the Linux header files?"
"No," replied a master.
"Must I submit code to Bitkeeper?"
"No," replied the master.
"Must I meditate daily and dedicate my life to Linux?"
"No," replied the master again.
"Must I go on a quest to ponder the meaning of the Tao?"
"No. A master is nothing more than a student who knows something of which he can teach to other students."
The novice understood.
And thus said the master:
"It is the way of the Tao."
A user came to a master who had great status in lkml. The user asked the master: "Which is easier: implementing new features to the kernel or documenting them?"
"Implementing new features," replied the master.
The confused user then exclaimed:
"Surely it is easier to write a few sentences in the man page than it is to write pages of code without error?"
"Not so," said the master. "When coding, the Tao of Linux opens my eyes wide and allows me to see beyond the code, to let the source flow from my fingers, to implement without flaw. When documenting, however, all I have to work with is a C in high school English."
He who compiles from the stable tree is stubborn
and unwilling to change, but is guaranteed reliability.
He who compiles from the current tree is wise but perhaps too conformist, but is guaranteed steadiness.
He who compiles from the unstable tree is adventurous and is guaranteed new innovations: some good, some bad.
He who compiles straight from Bitkeeper is brave but guaranteed turbulence.
They are all of the Tao. One shall respect the old, and debug the new; none shall argue over which is greatest.
There once was a user who scripted in Perl: "Look at what I have to work with here," he said to a master of core, "My code is interpreted dynamically, the syntax is unique and simple, I have sockets, strings, arrays, and everything I could ever need. Why don't you stop meddling in C and come join me?"
The C programmer described his reasoning to the scripter: "Script is to C as ebonics is to Latin. If the scripter does not grow beyond that of which he scripts, he will surely [die]. Besides, without C, how can there be script?"
The scripter was enlightened, and the two became close friends.
Does naming a temporary boolean variable SchroedingersCat constitute humor?
If so then, yes, programmers do have humor. (Atleast this one does...)
"GNU's not Unix....it's Linux" / Kami "kokamomi" Petersen
In the days when I was a die-harder coder (unlike the current easy life as a part time manager and part time developer) I used to keep my diary and calendar in code comments - those were, of course, the days without funky handhelds with funkier PIM systems :-) *sigh* The good old days....
-- Gaxx
Linked off of article here.
Easier to read too.
Around the middle of July last year the drive in my web server (a 10 year old 250mb SCSI) died. The first I knew about it was an error along the lines of "device is bolixed".
:)
It's about the most accurate error message I've seen yet - within half an hour it just wouldn't spin
a grrl & her server
A couple years ago the company I'm working for had sold the source to one of their business commerce systems to another company. The comments were sprinkled with some superlatives such as 'fuck' and 'son of a bitch' not to mention that there were a few other not-so-nice comments about other products like 'since this fucking windows bug' or what not heh. This other company was NOT very happy at all. It resulted in one person being let go when there were some small "budget" problems even though they just sold some software for over a million and this company wasn't very large (under 20). After he was let go they hired 3 new people. Lukly I just started about a week before this happened so I never got in trouble. Anyway, now the management scans the comments periodically to look for colorful words.
I've seen code from one of our vendors with comments such as "whoever wrote this should be shot. but it was probably me. no time to fix it." He both admitted it was sketchy code and said it like that - and then we bought it.
I've been known to "talk to myself" in my comments, but I do keep it PG-rated or cleaner. Sometimes at a function exit point you'll see "all done, have a nice day".
Only the best code written by the coolest people in a great working enviroment is like that.
I think that's the real reason MS won't release code. It isn't that the code sucks and they'd be emabrassed ( because that cat is already out of the bag), it's that it would reveal what a dull lot the lot of them were and make it hard to recruit.
I bet you won't find *one* "Fuck Clippy" comment in the whole code base, and you know they *want* to say it.
Damned marketroids won't let people have *any* fun.
KFG
My personal favorite is the "Hardware On Drugs" message.
/usr/src/linux
cd
grep -r drugs *
linux-2.4.19/drivers/net/wan/dscc4.c:
printk(KERN_INFO) "%s: hardware on drugs!\n", dev->name);
Karma: Not Particularly Funny.
Bill Paul, the guy who coded the Realtek 8139 driver put a very funny comment:
* The RealTek 8139 PCI NIC redefines the meaning of 'low end.' This is
* probably the worst PCI ethernet controller ever made, with the possible
* exception of the FEAST chip made by SMC. The 8139 supports bus-master
* DMA, but it has a terrible interface that nullifies any performance
* gains that bus-master DMA usually offers.
*
Ahh found the exact line:
/* linux, which is trying as desperately as the gnu folks can to be POSIXLY_CORRECT. I think I'm gonna hurl... */ -- *Hobbit*, taken from the netcat source
-sirket
someone talking about "Kernel Klink" embedded somewhere?
Of course not - we know NOTH-ING!
I want to drag this out as long as possible. Bring me my protractor.
In the VM subsystem for the Sun-3 kernel, about late 1986 I think, there appeared the following:
... /* You are not expected to understand this */
panic("Shannon and Bill say this can't happen");
One of the first mass market Unix boxes was sold through the now-defunct line of Tandy computer stores and contained a 68000 and a Z-80 as an I/O processor. They apparently had problems with the Z-80 going insane periodically. This would be noticed by the 68000 which would then...
panic("Beam us up Scotty, she's sucking mud again");
Of course the most famous of all is the comment in the task switching code of the original v6 Unix (Lyons commentary era) which said
One can be very colorful with variable names too.
...
I remember my high school computer teacher made us make a pixel drawing program. Part of the specs was to be able to toggle between draw and move mode.
The natural variable names were...
PenIsUp and PenIsDown
Tournament Management Online &
Invoicing, Time Tracking, Reporting
I was compiling Perl 5.8 when I found these funny little tidbits:
./Configure:
./configure stages of compiling the source.
From Perl 5.8.0's
"Checking to see how your cpp does stuff like catenate tokens...
Oh! Smells like ANSI's been here.
We can catify or stringify, separately or together!"
"You have POSIX termios.h... good!"
Gimp 1.2.3 was no less immune:
checking for intelligent life... not found
Both were found during the
"There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death." Proverbs 16:25 (NKJV)
And colleague and I where working a client E450 when we saw some funny ASCII art in /var/log/messages. At first, we believed that the machine got owned and the cracker was making fun of us. A little grepping later we found it in arch/sparc64/kernel/traps.c die_if_kernel() (around line 1450 for 2.4.18). I'd like to post the snippet, but the lameness filter refuse to let me do so. Go see for yourself.
BTW, kerneltrap.org comment posting system seem borked ... it ate my post !
:wq
Compare this to the boss I had that told me I wasn't allowed to call a variable "temp" (for temperature), because other programmers on the team might misunderstand and think that's a temporary variable.
www.HearMySoulSpeak.com
I ran across this gem awhile ago, been saving it as a text clipping on my desktop for years now waiting for the perfect moment to post:
- Shane Smith <Shane.F.Smith@Healthnet.com> on proper code indentation, in comp.os.vms
All editorial writers ever do is come down from the hill after the battle is over and shoot the wounded.
While working for a loony British midget at Cray Computer Corporation, I put the declaration "short volatile *VP;" into the compiler's optimization phase.
"Skill shows through where genius wears thin." -Wittgenstein || Religion: uniting aviation and architecture.
and one from the slackware adduser script..
i also remember a good one in the enlightenment configure script though i dont have it saved .. something about searching the -lfridge for lager ;)
Here's my favourite part of the Blender source:
/* Do you understand the implication? Do you? */
#ifdef WIN32
static int is_a_really_crappy_nvidia_card(void) {
static int well_is_it= -1;
if (well_is_it==-1)
well_is_it= (strcmp((char*) glGetString(GL_VENDOR), "NVIDIA Corporation") == 0);
return well_is_it;
}
#endif
from my old job at a dot com I was instructed to make the website "self-maintaining". I was laid off on a friday but was told I had to spend the next week doing this. I remember one of the last scripts I worked on had something like this:
if ( $get_out_while_you_can == $or_they_will_fuck_you ) {
$with_a_cold_aluminum_baseball_bat = 1;
}
and
if ( $this_company_is_run_by_morons == $i_hate_them_all ) {
die();
}
I wonder why nobody has mentioned this:
./net/core/netfilter.c
% sed -n 2,5p
* Heavily influenced by the old firewall.c by David Bonn and Alan Cox.
*
* Thanks to Rob `CmdrTaco' Malda for not influencing this code in any
* way.
I guess this is why Road Runner stuck me with one of these things.
They probably don't pay as much per unit as a decent chocolate bar.
It brings up an interesting use for having source though, even if you don't code. Before buying a particular bit of hardware it might be interesting to read the driver comments to see what the programer thought of the thing at the low level.
KFG
... (or maybe not) i usually find more funny comments in code from people who actually like coding (and are good at it) than from code monkeys .
Several years ago, there were three of us, all working (well, "working") for our university's solar car team. Most of the telemetry code was written by one of the other guys (whose basement I'm now writing this from), and somewhere mid-project his girlfriend royally screwed him over. As we now tell people, it wasn't that she was a raving bitch, it was just that she really, really liked guys. All of them, everywhere, personally and intimately. :)
:CRC16UpperCalc before the girlfriend disaster to things like :LivsABitchDieDieDie afterwards. Made for some very funny looks back at the old code, but rather frustrating for anybody to debug. After all, how was I supposed to know the difference between the functionality of one with three "die"s and one with four "die"s. And yes, there was a difference, and yes, he knew exactly what each did.
:)
Anyway, getting on with the story, after that event, he cranked out phenominal amounts of microcontroller code - all very intricate, clever, and good (from an engineer's point of view, not necessarily from a comp-sci view). However, written in assembly, he was forced to regularly come up with line labels for jumps in the code. These rapidly devolved from useful things like
Lousy maintainability, but it was microcontroller code that nobody would ever again touch. Or, based on what we know of the teams after us, even understand.
#endif
This text is here because the above code triggers the lame filter. You know, that thing they put in the slash code to force crapflooders to be creative.
The cake is a pie
arch/i386/kernel/dmi_scan.c
[...]
/*
* Check for clue free BIOS implementations who use
* the following QA technique
*
* [ Write BIOS Code ]<------
* | ^
* < Does it Compile >----N--
* |Y ^
* < Does it Boot Win98 >-N--
* |Y
* [Ship It]
*
I work in a professional software house, and a while back I write a utility to trawl through some source code for an application and extract the comments. The ratio of 'practical' comments to frustration-venting, sideswiping and humour ran at about 50:50.
/* Trust me...I know what I'm doing */
/* don't trust me...I may not know what he was doing */
One member of the team has a reputation for doing useful but wacky things, and most of examples of his code were prefixed with
At some point a bug-fix had been applied by a junior programmer, prefixed by
See here and my sig.
While this comment is humorous, it's also very deep. It shows that the coder understood what he was doing well enough to know that the behavior wasn't as expected... and anyone else touching the same code should expect problems.
It's rare, thankfully, but it is possible for code to trigger obscure compiler or even CPU bugs. These can be virtually impossible to track down, esp. if your boss is (justifiably) skeptical of your claim that the problem has to be in the compiler. In these cases the best you can do is flag the code as something that's very flaky.
(BTW, I have some personal experience with such code. I just hit one with a PNG decoder - one mode had a rare decoder error that would flip one pixel, but the mode meant that the error was propagated across multiple scan lines. A very careful review of the code showed no error, and when I tested the code on different hardware (a PC, not an embedded device) it worked perfectly on the same images. Therefore it has to be the cross-compiler or hardware, and all I could do was document the problem.)
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
I remember reading this as part of a warning really. There was a mainframe app, and there was a constant, and it was called BDOLVB. Some maintenance programmers inherited the system, and saw the obove constant, and didn't know what the hell it was. They tried to look it up, figure out what the meaning was, and they couldn't figure it out. They could see what it was set to, 1770 Octal, but didnt know what it meant. They put looking into it on the back-burner - the system worked but they were stil curious about the meaning. Eventually, after months, they found oout what it meant.
1770 = BirthDate Of Lidwig Van Beethoven
Since they spun their wheels for a few days tracking this down, they weren't smiling all that much at the cleverness of this.
The thing to remember is that code is harder to read than to write. The author has context, information that the reader doesn't have and has to guess at. If you want to be funny, do so, but don't interfere with the ultimate goal of source, to make it easy for people to see and change your code.