linux-hardening - Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] overflow: Remove is_non_negative() and is

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: <b549e430-5623-4c60-acb1-4b5e095ae870@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2026 23:26:35 +0100
From: Vincent Mailhol <mailhol@...nel.org>
To: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>,
 Nicolas Schier <nicolas@...sle.eu>
Cc: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>, Nicolas Schier <nsc@...nel.org>,
 Nick Desaulniers <nick.desaulniers+lkml@...il.com>,
 Bill Wendling <morbo@...gle.com>, Justin Stitt <justinstitt@...gle.com>,
 Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
 Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>, Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
 David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>, Simona Vetter <simona@...ll.ch>,
 Chris Mason <clm@...com>, David Sterba <dsterba@...e.com>,
 Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>, "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@...nel.org>,
 Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
 linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org, linux-sparse@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, llvm@...ts.linux.dev,
 dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org, kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] overflow: Remove is_non_negative() and
 is_negative()

On 02/01/2026 at 12:04, Miguel Ojeda wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 1, 2026 at 9:13 PM Nicolas Schier <nicolas@...sle.eu> wrote:
>>
>> thanks!  I think it's a bit sad to keep code only to make some checker
>> tooling happy, but for now it seems to be the right thing to do.
> 
> Perhaps a patch to add a comment explaining Vincent's findings would
> be a good outcome, i.e. explaining the reason it needs to remain in
> place for the moment 

OK. But I will send this as a separate patch as a reply to this thread
so that this can be discussed separately without having to respin the
main series again and again. I will add it back to the main series only
if it get a decent level of Acked-by tags.

> (even a link to lore.kernel.org to this thread would help).

It is rather uncommon to add lore.kernel.org links in the code comment.
But I am not against. I will do as you suggested so and see what people
think of it.

Yours sincerely,
Vincent Mailhol