| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <18740.193.171.152.33.1212122228.squirrel@webmail.marek.priv.at> Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 06:37:08 +0200 (CEST) From: "Philipp Marek" <philipp@...ek.priv.at> To: "Sam Ravnborg" <sam@...nborg.org> Cc: trivial@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch] removes casting of (void*) private structure members Hello Sam, you wrote: > Sample from your patch: ... > Therefore the cast is legitimate. > > And I expect gcc to emit: > warning: assignment makes pointer from integer without a cast Possibly mine didn't ... I'm getting some build errors related to static variables being initialized via htonl(), but I did a compile run with this patch. I think I used a clean kernel for testing - but maybe I was in the tree where I tested converting some "unsigned long priv;" to "void*", looking for problems - as I wrote: > > There are some private structure variables that are not defined as > > (void*), (but int or long) and cannot be done without a > > cast; examples in > > drivers/char/hw_random/intel-rng.c ... > > Should these be converted to (void*), and an additional > > patch supplied? If I do a patch for them, can that be a trivial patch, or should I send each type conversion to the maintainer? Regards, Phil -- 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