linux-kernel - Re: WARN_ON() which sometimes sucks

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 31 Jul 2007 17:02:48 +0100
From:	Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>
To:	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...ru>
Cc:	akpm@...l.org, torvalds@...l.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	herbert@...dor.apana.org.au
Subject: Re: WARN_ON() which sometimes sucks

On Tue, Jul 31, 2007 at 07:55:27PM +0400, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> It started when I tried to write
> 
> 	WARN_ON(m->seq_ops_allocated);
> 
> in today's "[PATCH] single_open/seq_release leak diagnostics?.
> Suprisingly compiler told me piss off with:
> 
> 	  CC      fs/seq_file.o
> 	fs/seq_file.c: In function 'seq_release':
> 	fs/seq_file.c:285: error: 'typeof' applied to a bit-field
> 
> Well, duh! Earlier versions of WARN_ON allowed that until commit
> 684f978347deb42d180373ac4c427f82ef963171? which added typeof().
> 
> OK, nobody noticed that WARN_ON(bitfield) stopped working. But I
> question the rationale of that commit:

Actually, the real problem is different - WTF do we need that typeof
anyway?
	int ret_warn_on = !!(condition);
	[same as now]
will work just fine...
-
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/