linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] i7core_edac: fix erroneous size of static array

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:	Thu, 13 Oct 2011 17:04:47 -0300
From:	Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...hat.com>
To:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...64.org>
CC:	"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
	Niklas Söderlund <niso@....se>,
	"linux-edac@...r.kernel.org" <linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] i7core_edac: fix erroneous size of static array

Em 13-10-2011 16:14, Borislav Petkov escreveu:
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 03:03:20PM -0400, Luck, Tony wrote:
>>> -	static int cols[8] = {
>>> +	static int cols[4] = {
>>
>> Why are these arrays "static"? Does that generate better code than
>> dynamic initialization?
> 
> They look like lookup arrays for count of things based on bit settings
> and as such they should be static because they don't ... change :). If
> they were dynamic, then inlining them in every function callsite would
> be not cool.

Btw, it probably makes sense to also declare as "const". In this specific case,
it is likely that gcc will discover that it is const anyway, and do some
optimization, but sometimes gcc don't do what I would expect ;)

Mauro.
--
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/