linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] blackfin checksum annotations

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:	Sun, 27 Apr 2008 06:38:37 +0100
From:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	cooloney@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] blackfin checksum annotations

On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 10:26:44PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
> Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2008 06:22:26 +0100
> 
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
> 
> Since these are networking knobs and Al tends to test his
> changes, I'll apply this to the net-2.6 tree.

FSVOtest in this case, since I don't have the hardware...  However,
all changes seen by gcc are actually
	* explicit cast to unsigned short in return expression of functions
returning unsigned short
	* csum_fold() return type changed from unsigned int to __sum16
(unsigned short), same as for all other architecture and as net/* expects;
expression actually returned is ((~(sum << 16)) >> 16) with sum being
unsigned 32bit, so it's (a) going to fit into the range of unsigned short
and (b) had been unsigned all along, so no sign expansion mess happened.

IOW, it should not break runtime, but... untested is untested.
--
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/