linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/6] RFC: Typesafe callbacks

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: <47949257.1000102@gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 21 Jan 2008 21:38:47 +0900
From:	Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
To:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
CC:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] RFC: Typesafe callbacks

Rusty Russell wrote:
> On Monday 21 January 2008 09:17:30 Rusty Russell wrote:
>> On Monday 21 January 2008 00:00:52 Tejun Heo wrote:
>>> What should be do are
>>>
>>> * Check that the threadfn's argument fits into void *.
>> For everything but timer, you'll get a warning if the data isn't assignable
>> to a void *, so you get a warning if you use a non-pointer already.
>>
>> But it would be cool to allow functions which take an unsigned long.
> ...
>> I'll test this out and see what I can make...
> 
> I think this comes under "too ugly", but here's an attempt.

Maybe we should be content with pointer type checking.  It seems like
it's going too far and after all the clutter it's not possible to use
int as argument.  :-(

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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/