Slashdot Mirror
Linus Torvalds Says 'Buggy Crap' Made It Into Linux 4.8 (theregister.co.uk)
Two days after Linus Torvalds announced the release of Linux 4.8, he began apologizing for a bug fix gone bad. The Register reports: "I'm really sorry I applied that last series from Andrew just before doing the 4.8 release, because they cause problems, and now it is in 4.8 (and that buggy crap is marked for stable too)." The "crap" in question is an attempt to fix a bug that's been present in Linux since version 3.15. Torvalds rates the fix for that bug "clearly worse than the bug it tried to fix, since that original bug has never killed my machine!" Torvalds isn't happy with kernel contributor Andrew Morton, who he says is debugging with a known bad use of BUG_ON(). "I've ranted against people using BUG_ON() for debugging in the past. Why the f*ck does this still happen?" Torvalds writes, pointing to a 2002 post to the kernel mailing list outlining how to do BUG_ON() right. He later adds "so excuse me for being upset that people still do this shit almost 15 years later."
we're introducing systemgdb
So that I can live a lifetime where I never make a mistake and everyone in the world is a moron compared to me.
Actually Linus, there is a good excuse - when the failing of a logic assertion could silently lead to behavior that is worse than a kernel halt, specifically data corruption.
Overlord issues 'BUG_ON() considered harmful' edict 14 years ago and only now thinks about removing said anti-feature?
> I want to ... live a lifetime where everyone in the world is a moron compared to me.
You really don't. Dealing with morons is frustrating. When everyone is a moron (regarding the subject at hand), every interaction is frustrating.
I don't *excuse* Linus's temperament when it comes to kernel goofs, but I do understand it. There are a couple of very specific topics that I've studied and researched for decades. When I have discuss to those topics with people who have other specialties, and let them have input and make decisions that are within my realm of expertise but not theirs, it can be very frustrating. Because Linus is the expert on the Linux kernel, and he's a perfectionist, I understand it may get very frustrating to continually deal with mistakes that are, to him, stupid mistakes.
Linus isn't likely to invite you out for an ice cream cone to discuss a bug and your feelings about it but, he's right that it's a pretty bad bug (http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1610.0/00878.html). Luckily, the way kernel development works means that 99.9999% of users will never see this bug. No major distro has shipped this yet and by the time this kernel trickles down to users (if ever), the bug will be fixed.
He's not apologizing. Saying "I'm sorry blank blank blank" doesn't constitute an apology.
I'm really sorry I applied that last series from Andrew
That's not an apology. That's saying he's disappointed someone screwed up, and he named that person to direct the blame towards that person. No dev team I've ever been on would throw someone under the bus like that. We would take responsibility as a team. He might as well say "I'm sorry Andrew sucks as a developer and is so incompetent", because that is no less an apology than what he actually did say.
Now had he said "I'm really sorry I didn't do my job and I didn't properly test contributions, and as the gatekeeper to what code becomes official, I take full responsibility for the bug and I'm taking actions to do my job better in the future", well, that would be an apology.
Better known as 318230.
As I'm not a developer, I had to read through some of the comments left to the original stories to figure out what the fuss was all about.
Maybe most Slashdot readers are more focused than I am on coding and already know all of this. But what I learned is that essentially, sticking this BUG_ON line someplace in the code causes Linux to do the equivalent of a Windows blue screen of death when it hits it. It's a purposeful way to cause an instant system halt because you believe the software should never reach that spot in the code, and if it does, you're worried that data corruption will result -- so better to halt things than let that happen.
It sounds like even back in 2002 though, Linus was expressing his dislike for using it and recommended a WARN_ON alternative that would just alert people to the issue but let things continue.
The thing is? I'm not entirely sure Linus's anger is warranted here? It sounds like basically, he's of the philosophy that "the code must go on". In other words, it's almost always better to keep the system running, despite any bugs, than to kernel panic and stop the whole thing. Perhaps in a world of virtual machines and servers running a whole slew of different processes at the same time, there's logic to this? (EG. If one of your boxes is needed to perform DNS, DHCP and/or other basic functions for a whole network -- you'd probably rather it keep doing those things, even if a bug is hit that means a process reading/writing data to files someplace else gets a critical error that could corrupt records in a database or improperly truncate some other file it was working with.)
BUT .... this could just as easily be subjective, based on where the bug lies and what it impacts, vs. what YOU consider a mission critical use of the machine in question. If BUG_ON saves data from loss, maybe that really is better for SOME users than letting it go on generating/logging warnings that people aren't going to notice right away?
I get the idea Linus leans the direction he does on this issue mainly because he wants any kernel he approves as "stable" to have that appearance, buggy or not.
Buncha snowflakes and pop-tarts can't handle some feedback with a few 'fucks' thrown in??
You are in the wrong damn career. Computers and their software WAS BUILT with profanity. It is part of the culture.It is just like the military. Wars are won with profanity and murder.
If you don't want to hear it then go teach preschoolers how to color.
Dangit gotta warn me when you are posting... now I'm going to have to replace the troll detector again. And two rooms of the house where it was sitting .. and a cat.
Ya, all those young programmers that don't know about 15 year old discussions on the use of the BUG_ON macro etc., so they keep re-inventing the square wheel...that'll fix things!
Sometimes AC's say the stupidest shit.
If you actually read the thread, that's basically where he says it's appropriate, and only then.
The problem appears to be that people are using that feature in situations where recovery is feasible and desirable, or they're using it under the assumption that it only impacts people running special development kernels.
Log in or piss off.
I understand that this is a troll post but, it still makes me laugh. Software guys over the age of 40 are a pain in the ass to work with because they've seen so much idiocy over their careers that they can spot it immediately and point it out. If you are in your 20s and working with other people in their 20s, the echo chamber you live in is certainly re-affirming but, not particularly conducive to writing good software.
I don't think the problem is that everyone else is a moron (though there are a lot of them to be sure), it's that everyone else has a different plan, agenda, goal, technique. So one person who lives and breathes the code is annoyed at other people who may want to get home early, are new to the code, are under a lot of pressure to get it done fast, and so forth. At the work place, should you accuse the employee of being incompetent at the task, or blame the manager for assigning a person without the necessary skills and experience to that task?
There's some good stuff in Linux. But damn it's an unreadable mess in so many places. I like looking at BSD based code because it is so often much more straight forward and easier to understand.
So where in the open source world are there regular code reviews with thought out discussions about how to write code better, how to follow the correct style guidelines, pointing out "oh by the way, you're using BUG_ON() the wrong way", and stuff like that?
I do excuse it.
He is attacking the mistake of the person and not the person.
Taking such stuff personally is ridiculous, but I suppose it does give people something to talk about with something that's almost a non-issue.
Btw, I *am* the moron in kernel dev. My name is in the kernel changelog exactly once, which means I helped find and fix a problem when I had never done so before - I didn't know what the heck I was doing. Kernel development is very complex, with it's own set of rules quite different from userspace and I was in there trying to work on it, sending emails to the maintainer of the md subsystem (raid etc.) For anyone reading my emails or code, I was, compared to them, a moron. My flailing about might have been frustrating for them.
On the other hand, after almost 20 years I understand Linux pretty well from the userspace perspective, particularly the storage and security side of things. So when I'm in a meeting at work and the project manager wants to put certain files "on the C drive", when he wants to defrag and log in as Administrator, he becomes the moron and I'm the one getting frustrated.
Sure, an ideal software team is basically:
- 1-2 grumpy old guys who are mostly just trying to steer the project away from disaster.
- A couple guys a bit younger than that who are less jaded than the grumpy old guys but, kinda get where they are coming from and so genuinely think about the code they are writing.
- A couple of young guys that just finished a C++ book and enthusiastically want to use templates everywhere.
That's a software team that can get shit done. And, probably won't be using the excuse of "refactoring" to rewrite it in six months.