linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] bitops: Provide generic sign_extend function (moving it out from wireless code)

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, 27 Aug 2010 18:09:51 -0400
From:	Bob Copeland <me@...copeland.com>
To:	Andreas Herrmann <herrmann.der.user@...glemail.com>
Cc:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Borislav Petkov <borislav.petkov@....com>,
	Zhu Yi <yi.zhu@...el.com>,
	"Luis R. Rodriguez" <lrodriguez@...eros.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bitops: Provide generic sign_extend function (moving it
 out from wireless code)

On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 6:16 AM, Andreas Herrmann
<herrmann.der.user@...glemail.com> wrote:

> -static int sign_extend(int val, const int nbits)
> -static s32 sign_extend(u32 oper, int index)

Note these two are specified slightly differently, so return different
values with the same arguments.  The ath[59]k version takes the number
of bits (1-based) while the other one takes the position of the high
order bit (0-based).  I think the former is a little more natural but
it's a matter of taste.

Anyway I personally have no problem with merging them once the above
is fixed.  I wrote a similar patch when I wrote the ath5k version, but
never bothered to submit it.

-- 
Bob Copeland %% www.bobcopeland.com
--
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/