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:	Mon, 10 Dec 2012 15:01:38 -0500
From:	Theodore Ts'o <>
To:	Carlos Maiolino <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext4: Ensure Inode flags consistency are checked in
 build time [V2]

On Mon, Dec 03, 2012 at 03:32:56PM -0200, Carlos Maiolino wrote:
> Flags being used by atomic operations in inode flags (e.g.
> ext4_test_inode_flag(), should be consistent with that actually stored in
> inodes, i.e.: EXT4_XXX_FL.
> It ensures that this consistency is checked at build-time, not at run-time.
> Currently, the flags consistency are being checked at run-time, but, there is no
> real reason to not do a build-time check instead of a run-time check. The code
> is comparing macro defined values with enum type variables, where both are
> constants, so, there is no problem in comparing constants at build-time.
> enum variables are treated as constants by the C compiler, according to the C99
> specs (see sec. 6.2.5, item
> 16), so, there is no real problem in comparing an enumeration type at build time
> CC'ing Sergio who helped me to achieve this conclusion, in case there is
> something else we need to discuss.
> Signed-off-by: Carlos Maiolino <>

Thanks, applied.

						- Ted
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists