Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] trace2: stop allowing die()
- From
Derrick Stolee <stolee@gmail.com>
- Date
- Sep 1, 2026, 13:42 UTC
- Message-ID
- <c2c2d78a-52da-4814-9d05-ac757b164817@gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <20260901050311.GA1077240@coredump.intra.peff.net>
On 9/1/2026 1:03 AM, Jeff King wrote:
Show 14 quoted lines
> On Tue, Sep 01, 2026 at 01:01:30AM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > >>> I don't have much knowledge of CodeQL, but the following vibe-coded >>> .ql script is able to detect these transitive calls and demonstrate >>> the issue: >> >> Yeah, I think the whack-a-mole can be solved with static analysis that >> actually understands the complete (possible) call tree. And then you >> wouldn't even really need your banned-die.h, because you'd have the real >> thing. > > Just to be clear, I am not opposed to banned-die.h in the meantime if it > is helpful to your goals. The whack-a-mole is not something I would > choose to spend time on, but you are welcome to. ;)
It's helpful in the sense that it demonstrates progress during the refactor, but it's less helpful as a long-term protection. Which you point out quite well.
I could easily send a v4 that removes patch 1 and all references to banned-die.h with a focus on "die() less in trace2" to start this reduction, but with the knowledge that it isn't sufficient, yet.
Thanks, -Stolee