Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 9 Jan 1997 11:19:44 +1100 (EST)
From:      proff@suburbia.net
To:        michaelh@cet.co.jp (Michael Hancock)
Cc:        hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: <sys/queue.h> potential for panic
Message-ID:  <19970109001944.25945.qmail@suburbia.net>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SV4.3.95.970109083859.16689B-100000@parkplace.cet.co.jp> from Michael Hancock at "Jan 9, 97 08:57:31 am"

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On Wed, 1 Jan 1997, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> 
> > 
> > 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 ?

#ifdef DIAGNOSTIC
check
#endif

is what it needs

-Julian <proff@iq.org>



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19970109001944.25945.qmail>