lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 05:28:04 +0200 From: Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@...dent.ltu.se> To: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com> CC: Milind Arun Choudhary <milindchoudhary@...il.com>, kernel-janitors@...ts.osdl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [KJ][PATCH] BIT macro cleanup Alexey Dobriyan wrote: > On Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 09:03:09AM +0530, Milind Arun Choudhary wrote: > >> --- a/include/linux/bitops.h >> +++ b/include/linux/bitops.h >> @@ -8,6 +8,9 @@ >> */ >> #include <asm/bitops.h> >> >> +#define BIT(nr) (1UL << ((nr) % BITS_PER_LONG)) >> > > I think this would be a disaster because something like > > BIT(123) > > would not even generate a warning. > There were a discussion on this, at KJ, when BIT was first used with a modular operation. I said the same thing as you do now, but a big user of BIT is the input-subsystem who defined their BIT as above. Also it was mentioned that the compiler can only find the statical errors, a variable input can break it in runtime. + if we _really_ want to check the tree for such warnings, it is easy to remove the modular operation temporarily (and keep away of input/) I don't say I like this, just that it is a choose between possible errors. Richard Knutsson - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists