linux-kernel - Re: kernel.h: add ARRAY_AND_SIZE() macro to complement ARRAY

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, 19 Sep 2008 21:55:44 +0400
From:	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
To:	Russ Dill <russ.dill@...il.com>
Cc:	Eric Miao <eric.y.miao@...il.com>,
	Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.arm.linux.org.uk,
	Ben Dooks <ben-linux@...ff.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: kernel.h: add ARRAY_AND_SIZE() macro to complement
	ARRAY_SIZE().

On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 08:28:45AM -0700, Russ Dill wrote:
> My vote is for ARRAY_AND_SIZE to spread far and wide across the land.
> ARRAY_SIZE is already very safe, as it has a __must_be_array macro
> built in. So ARRAY_AND_SIZE is even safer, as it prevents you from
> mixing up two different arrays. It also reduces line length and makes
> driver and device (usually platform_device) registration code easier
> to read.

It also spreads ARRAY_SIZE misnaming futher.

It introduces one more core macro and quite pointless one. I can't
personally recall a single bug where sizeof() was taken from another
array.

It creates interesting confusion point: ARRAY_AND_SIZE is about array
and it's size. What ARRAY_SIZE is about then?

You want default argument values in fact, but C is C.

	Alexey "(array (nr (length array)))" Dobriyan
--
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/