From owner-freebsd-current  Wed Jan  1 04:50:27 1997
Return-Path: <owner-current>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) id EAA27126
          for current-outgoing; Wed, 1 Jan 1997 04:50:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tfs.com (tfs.com [140.145.250.1])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) with SMTP id EAA27121
          for <current@freebsd.org>; Wed, 1 Jan 1997 04:50:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from schizo.dk.tfs.com by tfs.com (smail3.1.28.1) with SMTP
	id m0vfQ7F-0003vzC; Wed, 1 Jan 97 04:49 PST
Received: from critter.dk.tfs.com (critter-home [193.162.32.19]) by schizo.dk.tfs.com (8.8.2/8.7.3) with ESMTP id NAA25001 for <current@freebsd.org>; Wed, 1 Jan 1997 13:49:51 +0100 (MET)
Received: from critter.dk.tfs.com (localhost.phk.dk [127.0.0.1]) by critter.dk.tfs.com (8.8.2/8.8.2) with ESMTP id NAA12722 for <current@freebsd.org>; Wed, 1 Jan 1997 13:52:37 +0100 (MET)
To: current@freebsd.org
Subject: <sys/queue.h> potential for panic
Reply-to: phk@freebsd.org
Date: Wed, 01 Jan 1997 13:52:37 +0100
Message-ID: <12720.852123157@critter.dk.tfs.com>
From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.dk.tfs.com>
Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk


TAILQ_REMOVE and STAILQ_REMOVE would panic with a zero dereference
if you tried to remove something not on the queue.

Wouldn't it make sense to avoid that, or would the overhead be considered
prohibitive ?

--
Poul-Henning Kamp           | phk@FreeBSD.ORG       FreeBSD Core-team.
http://www.freebsd.org/~phk | phk@login.dknet.dk    Private mailbox.
whois: [PHK]                | phk@tfs.com	    TRW Financial Systems, Inc.
Future will arrive by its own means, progress not so.