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]

Message-Id: <1217010347.5971.24.camel@brick>
Date:	Fri, 25 Jul 2008 11:25:47 -0700
From:	Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@...il.com>
To:	Nish Aravamudan <nish.aravamudan@...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 Fri, 2008-07-25 at 11:22 -0700, Nish Aravamudan wrote:
> 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?

*sigh*

Yes they should, I sent the wrong mbox after this failed to compile
and fixed it.

Cheers,

Harvey

--
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/