linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH] fix abs() macro to work with types wider than int

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]

Date:	Wed, 25 Apr 2007 11:26:49 -0400 (EDT)
From:	"John Anthony Kazos Jr." <jakj@...-k-j.com>
To:	Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>
cc:	Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@...dent.ltu.se>,
	Jiri Bohac <jbohac@...e.cz>, akpm@...l.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] fix abs() macro to work with types wider than int

> > > I think it's like it is just to be consistent with abs() in C,
> > > which also contains labs() and llabs().
> > >   
> > We actually had labs() before (few months ago), but since it was not 
> > used, and if it would it seemed better to just fix abs(), it was 
> > removed. So I think this is the appropriate way to go.
> 
> Sounds like when someone actually needs labs() or llabs()
> they can submit a patch for however they would like to use it.

However they would like to use *abs()? What different ways are possible to 
take the arithmetic absolute value? I see record of many cases where 
dozens of authors have macros that then get collapsed to include files. So 
why not avoid that annoyance this time and -start- with it in the include 
files?

Can there even be any reason beyond unnecessary pedantics to have 
[l[l]]abs?
-
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/