linux-kernel - Re: Sparse 0.2 warnings from {asm,net}/checksum.h

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20070101191015.GB20443@redhat.com>
Date:	Mon, 1 Jan 2007 14:10:15 -0500
From:	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>
To:	Tilman Schmidt <tilman@...p.cc>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Sparse 0.2 warnings from {asm,net}/checksum.h

On Mon, Jan 01, 2007 at 03:23:45PM +0100, Tilman Schmidt wrote:
 > With sparse 0.2, my previously sparse-clean driver generates the
 > following warnings:
 > 
 > include/asm/checksum.h:182:6: warning: symbol 'sum' shadows an earlier one
 > include/asm/checksum.h:178:28: originally declared here
 > include/net/checksum.h:33:6: warning: symbol 'sum' shadows an earlier one
 > include/net/checksum.h:31:27: originally declared here
 > 
 > Architecture is i386. The lines referred to are in the functions
 > csum_and_copy_to_user() and csum_and_copy_from_user(), but I
 > don't see why sparse would emit such a warning for that code.

It's complaining about the 'sum' declaration in __range_not_ok
used by access_ok(), which shadows the variable declared in
the prototype of the functions you mention.

		Dave

-- 
http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/