linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Use __kernel_long_t in struct mq

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:	Thu, 26 Dec 2013 10:10:35 -0800
From:	"H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@...il.com>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Use __kernel_long_t in struct mq_attr

On Thu, Dec 26, 2013 at 10:03 AM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
> On 12/26/2013 09:59 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>
>>> but it would seem to give the wrong types when __BITS_PER_LONG in
>>> userspace is 32.
>>>
>>
>> For x32,  __BITS_PER_LONG is 64, not 32. If __BITS_PER_LONG
>>  is 32, my patch doesn't change anything.  If it works before,
>> it still works.  If it is broken before, it remains broken.
>>
>> I prefer my first patch, which is less clutter.  But I can't guarantee
>> it is correct for all x3-like ABIs.  My second patch has more
>> clutter, but it has no impact on other ABIs.
>>
>
> It's rather simple to prove, which is to consider the generic definition
> of __kernel_[u]long_t.
>

Then. I withdrew my second alternative with  __BITS_PER_LONG == 64
check..  Please use my first alternative for all my kernel_long_t and
kernel_ulong_t patches.

Thanks.

-- 
H.J.
--
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/