linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] lib/vsnprintf: Add %par specifier for sake of consistency

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:   Wed, 11 Jan 2017 16:59:20 -0800
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux@...musvillemoes.dk,
        arnd.bergmann@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] lib/vsnprintf: Add %par specifier for sake of
 consistency

On Wed, 2017-01-11 at 15:57 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Jan 2017 18:28:07 +0200 Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> 
> > While resource_size_t is repeating phys_addr_t, allocate %par specifier for
> > that type for sake of consistency.
> > 
> 
> I'm struggling to see the value in this.  A more detailed changelog
> would help, explaining why you think the kernel would benefit from
> this.
> 
> Are there callsites which should be converted?  If so, a patch which
> does at least some of those would be helpful.

A resource_size_t isn't a different size than a phys_addr_t.
Not so far anyway.

$ git grep typedef.*resource_size_t include
include/linux/types.h:typedef phys_addr_t resource_size_t;

Is there an arch that needs a different size?
If not, why add another case?
Just to make the kernel larger?