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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2022 15:43:02 +0000 From: "Uecker, Martin" <Martin.Uecker@....uni-goettingen.de> To: "keescook@...omium.org" <keescook@...omium.org>, "linux@...musvillemoes.dk" <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>, "corbet@....net" <corbet@....net>, "David.Laight@...LAB.COM" <David.Laight@...LAB.COM> CC: "mingo@...nel.org" <mingo@...nel.org>, "rikard.falkeborn@...il.com" <rikard.falkeborn@...il.com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org" <linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org>, "torvalds@...ux-foundation.org" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, "miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com" <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>, "gustavoars@...nel.org" <gustavoars@...nel.org>, "penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp" <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>, "andy.shevchenko@...il.com" <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>, "akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, "arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>, "linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>, "ndesaulniers@...gle.com" <ndesaulniers@...gle.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] linux/const.h: Explain how __is_constexpr() works Am Mittwoch, den 02.02.2022, 08:49 +0000 schrieb David Laight: > From: Rasmus Villemoes > > Sent: 01 February 2022 13:06 > ... > > > + * - The C standard defines an "integer constant expression" as different > > > + * from a "null pointer constant" (an integer constant 0 pointer). > > > > I don't see the point of this bullet. Yes, an ICE is a distinct concept > > from a null pointer constant, obviously. One is defined in terms of the > > other - and your parenthesis is not an accurate paraphrase of the > > definition of a null pointer constant. > > From what I remember a "null pointer constant" is in "integer constant > expression with value 0 cast to a pointer type". > So (void *)(1-1) is just as valid as (void *)0. > > Not sure any of it is relevant here. The C standard (at least public drafts essentially identical to the actual standards) can be found here: http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/projects#9899 "An integer constant expression with the value 0, or such an expression cast to type void *, is called a null pointer constant." BTW: I think it would be very valuable if WG14 would get proposals and/or comments from the kernel community. Martin > David > > - > Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK > Registration No: 1397386 (Wales) >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists