linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH jiffies] Avoid undefined behavior from signed overflow

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: <CA+55aFxOp-uNHQydWfa90H+DCDvZK6d2N0fGgSNkHNrLuYWMLA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sun, 4 Aug 2013 12:16:02 -0700
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Paul McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	Kevin Easton <kevin@...rana.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH jiffies] Avoid undefined behavior from signed overflow

On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 7:28 AM, Paul E. McKenney
<paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>>
>> Ahh, there's an error in the commit message (it says signed to unsigned).
>
> Good catch, fixed!

.. so I ended up waiting for that fixed version due to this email, but
it never came. Should I just apply the original and re-fix it myself?
Or is this queued up for 3.12 as being "not likely to actually
matter", which is quite possibly true (since we compile with
"-fno-strict-overflow", and thus gcc should hopefully not ever do any
transformations that depend on signed integer overflows being
undefined)

                   Linus
--
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/