linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] byteorder: force in-place endian conversion to always evaluate args

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:	Fri, 25 Jul 2008 11:22:22 -0700
From:	"Nish Aravamudan" <nish.aravamudan@...il.com>
To:	"Harvey Harrison" <harvey.harrison@...il.com>
Cc:	"Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"David Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] byteorder: force in-place endian conversion to always evaluate args

On 7/25/08, Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@...il.com> wrote:
> David Miller reported breakage in ide when the in-place byteorder helpers
>  were used as the macros do not always evaluate their args which led to
>  an infinite loop.
>
>  Just make them functions to ensure they always do so.
>
>  Signed-off-by: Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@...il.com>
>  ---
>   include/linux/byteorder/big_endian.h    |   60 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------
>   include/linux/byteorder/little_endian.h |   60 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------
>   2 files changed, 96 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
>
>  diff --git a/include/linux/byteorder/big_endian.h b/include/linux/byteorder/big_endian.h
>  index 961ed4b..b53ccd0 100644
>  --- a/include/linux/byteorder/big_endian.h
>  +++ b/include/linux/byteorder/big_endian.h
>  @@ -88,18 +88,54 @@ static inline __u16 __be16_to_cpup(const __be16 *p)
>   {
>         return (__force __u16)*p;
>   }
>  -#define __cpu_to_le64s(x) __swab64s((x))
>  -#define __le64_to_cpus(x) __swab64s((x))
>  -#define __cpu_to_le32s(x) __swab32s((x))
>  -#define __le32_to_cpus(x) __swab32s((x))
>  -#define __cpu_to_le16s(x) __swab16s((x))
>  -#define __le16_to_cpus(x) __swab16s((x))
>  -#define __cpu_to_be64s(x) do {} while (0)
>  -#define __be64_to_cpus(x) do {} while (0)
>  -#define __cpu_to_be32s(x) do {} while (0)
>  -#define __be32_to_cpus(x) do {} while (0)
>  -#define __cpu_to_be16s(x) do {} while (0)
>  -#define __be16_to_cpus(x) do {} while (0)
>  +
>  +static inline void __cpu_to_le64s(__u64 *p)
>  +{
>  +       __swab64s(x);
>  +}

Shouldn't all the x's in the function bodies be p's? And I thought
David already posted a macro version of this change along the lines of
hpa's reply?

Thanks,
Nish
--
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/