linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH,RFC] ext3: Add support for non-native signed/unsigned htree hash algorithms

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]

Message-ID: <49021319.4050302@goop.org>
Date:	Fri, 24 Oct 2008 11:25:29 -0700
From:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To:	Andreas Dilger <adilger@....com>
CC:	Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH,RFC] ext3: Add support for non-native signed/unsigned
 htree hash algorithms

Andreas Dilger wrote:
>
>> Hmm..... is it considered safe to depend on the userspace limits.h
>> header file?  I guess if we trust that header file to be correct we
>> could check the value of CHAR_MIN and/or CHAR_MAX as defined by
>> limits.h.
>>     
>
> That would likely fail on cross-compiled environments, right?
>   

/usr/include/limits.h uses #include_next to pick up gcc's private 
limits.h, so it should be safe to use in a kernel cross-build 
environment.  (Picking up the compiler's limits.h directly would be better.)

    J
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html