linux-kernel - Re: [patch] removes casting of (void*) private structure members

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 30 May 2008 06:37:08 +0200 (CEST)
From:	"Philipp Marek" <philipp@...ek.priv.at>
To:	"Sam Ravnborg" <sam@...nborg.org>
Cc:	trivial@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] removes casting of (void*) private structure members

Hello Sam,

you wrote:
> Sample from your patch:
...
> Therefore the cast is legitimate.
>
> And I expect gcc to emit:
> warning: assignment makes pointer from integer without a cast
Possibly mine didn't ... I'm getting some build errors related to static
variables being initialized via htonl(), but I did a compile run with this
patch.

I think I used a clean kernel for testing - but maybe I was in the tree
where I tested converting some "unsigned long priv;" to "void*", looking
for problems - as I wrote:
> > There are some private structure variables that are not defined as
> > (void*), (but int or long) and cannot be done without a
> > cast; examples in
> >   drivers/char/hw_random/intel-rng.c
...
> > Should these be converted to (void*), and an additional
> > patch supplied?
If I do a patch for them, can that be a trivial patch, or should I send
each type conversion to the maintainer?


Regards,

Phil

--
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/