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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2007 13:53:25 +1000 From: Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org> To: Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk> Cc: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...ru>, akpm@...l.org, torvalds@...l.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, herbert@...dor.apana.org.au Subject: Re: WARN_ON() which sometimes sucks Al Viro writes: > Actually, the real problem is different - WTF do we need that typeof > anyway? > int ret_warn_on = !!(condition); > [same as now] > will work just fine... It will mean more code on architectures which have a conditional-trap-on-nonzero instruction, such as powerpc, since the compiler will generate instructions to evaluate !!x. But I don't see any reason why ret_warn_on couldn't be a long. Paul. - 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists