netdev - Re: [patch] bonding: comparing a u8 with -1 is always false

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, 04 Nov 2011 18:37:38 -0400 (EDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	dan.carpenter@...cle.com
Cc:	fubar@...ibm.com, wpan@...hat.com, andy@...yhouse.net,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
	bhutchings@...arflare.com
Subject: Re: [patch] bonding: comparing a u8 with -1 is always false

From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 23:53:51 +0300

> On Fri, Nov 04, 2011 at 01:02:01PM -0700, Jay Vosburgh wrote:
>> 
>> 	Since you #define SPEED_UNKNOWN to -1 (below), how does this
>> actually change anything?  Did you mean 0xffff (because struct
>> ethtool_cmd's speed is a u16)?
>> 
> 
> Sorry I could have explained this better in the changelog.  The
> slave->speed is stored in a u32 and the -1 works fine as is.
> Obviously, as you point out the define doesn't change anything.  I
> just changed it so it would look symetric with DUPLEX_UNKNOWN.
> 
> But I think you missed that I defined #define DUPLEX_UNKNOWN 0xff.
> Before it we used a -1 for both and that didn't work.
> 
> I can resend this with a note about the SPEED_UNKNOWN cleanup if
> you'd like.  I'll do that tomorrow or Sunday.

That won't be necessary, I'll apply your patch as-is.

Thanks Dan.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html