linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH 4/4] Staging: hv: Fix warning by casting a (const void *) to (void *)

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Wed, 29 Jul 2009 20:13:56 +0000
From:	Hank Janssen <hjanssen@...rosoft.com>
To:	Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>, Nicolas Palix <npalix@...u.dk>
CC:	"kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org" <kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 4/4] Staging: hv: Fix warning by casting a (const void
 *) to (void *)


>On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 02:10:28PM +0200, Nicolas Palix wrote:
>>
>> Fix compilation warning by casting the const void *Buffer
>> variable into a void *.
>>
>>>
[....]
>> Signed-off-by: Nicolas Palix <npalix@...u.dk>
>> ---
>>  drivers/staging/hv/Channel.c |    2 +-
>>  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/hv/Channel.c b/drivers/staging/hv/Channel.c
>> index 68f3442..854fa30 100644
>> --- a/drivers/staging/hv/Channel.c
>> +++ b/drivers/staging/hv/Channel.c
>> @@ -787,7 +787,7 @@ VmbusChannelSendPacket(
>>       bufferList[0].Data = &desc;
>>       bufferList[0].Length = sizeof(VMPACKET_DESCRIPTOR);
>>
>> -     bufferList[1].Data = Buffer;
>> +     bufferList[1].Data = (void *)Buffer;
>
>Yeah, I thought about doing this as well, but it's wrong.  If this
>buffer really isn't being modified, then the Data pointer needs to be
>const.
>
>Or, if the Data pointer really is going to not be const, then the
>function parameters need to be changed, but that means lots of code
>needs to be changed.
>
>Hank, what do you think is the correct thing to do here?
>
>thanks,
>
>greg k-h

I think both will work. At some point in the past for this design was
To leave open the possibility for having the buffer modified. Right
Now I am pretty sure that it does not get modified.

I am not tied to using either void or const. What makes more sense, are
The kernel guidelines that if it does not get modified to define it as const?

The only thing about changing the API signature is that it does trickle into
A bunch of changes (primarily in Channel.[ch], ChannelInterface.[ch] and RingBuffer.[ch])


Thanks,

Hank.


--
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/