netdev - Re: [PATCH V2 5/5] net: can: ifi: Add IFI CANFD IP support

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, 20 Jan 2016 13:58:04 +0100
From:	Marek Vasut <marex@...x.de>
To:	"Marc Kleine-Budde" <mkl@...gutronix.de>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@...tkopp.net>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@...ndegger.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 5/5] net: can: ifi: Add IFI CANFD IP support

On Wednesday, January 20, 2016 at 11:54:21 AM, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:
> On 01/20/2016 11:39 AM, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:
> >> +/* IFI CANFD private data structure */
> >> +struct ifi_canfd_priv {
> >> +	struct can_priv		can;	/* must be the first member */
> >> +	struct napi_struct	napi;
> >> +	struct net_device	*ndev;
> >> +	struct device		*device;
> > 
> > Nitpick: This variable is write only, correct? I can fix this while
> > applying the patch.
> > 
> >> +	void __iomem		*base;
> >> +};
> > 
> > Otherweise looks good.

It's write-only, yeah. What would you propose to change here ?

> Until compiling:
> > drivers/net/can/ifi_canfd/ifi_canfd.c:486:40: warning: cast truncates
> > bits from constant value (ffffffff7ffffffd becomes 7ffffffd)
> > drivers/net/can/ifi_canfd/ifi_canfd.c:640:9: warning: cast truncates
> > bits from constant value (ffffffff7fffffff becomes 7fffffff)
> > drivers/net/can/ifi_canfd/ifi_canfd.c:676:9: warning: cast truncates
> > bits from constant value (ffffffff7fffffff becomes 7fffffff)
> 
> target is ARMv5 with gcc version 4.9.2, compiled with C=2 using sparse
> v0.5.0.

It's again the BIT() macro :-/ Do you have any idea how to fix this please ?
Doing something like u32 foo = ~BIT(31); triggers this splat and I am running
out of ideas how to fix that.

Best regards,
Marek Vasut