linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RESEND net-next 1/7] bonding: use ether_addr_equal

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 2 Jan 2014 11:42:46 +0100 (CET)
From:	Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
To:	Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@...wei.com>
cc:	Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
	Jay Vosburgh <fubar@...ibm.com>,
	Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@...hat.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND net-next 1/7] bonding: use ether_addr_equal_unaligned
 for bond addr compare

On Thu, 2 Jan 2014, Ding Tianhong wrote:

> On 2014/1/2 18:26, Ding Tianhong wrote:
> > On 2014/1/2 17:14, Julia Lawall wrote:
> >> On Thu, 2 Jan 2014, Ding Tianhong wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 2014/1/2 16:38, Julia Lawall wrote:
> >>>> On Thu, 2 Jan 2014, Ding Tianhong wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> On 2014/1/2 15:39, Julia Lawall wrote:
> >>>>>> Are the casts needed
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Yes, otherwise the warming will report:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> /net-next/drivers/net/bonding/bond_3ad.c:427: warning: passing argument 1 of ‘ether_addr_equal_64bits’ from incompatible pointer type
> >>>>
> >>>> Is it necessary for this driver to use a different type from everyone 
> >>>> else?
> >>>>
> >>>> julia
> >>>>
> >>> Did you mean the MAC_ADDRESS_EQUAL is excess?
> >>> I did not remove it because the codes no need to be changed more and it looks that didn't take any negative effect.
> >>
> >> No, I was wondering about the mac_addr type, defined in bond_3ad.h.  Other 
> >> code just has the array inlined into the containing structure.
> >>
> >> julia
> >>
> 
> I reviewed the struct mac_addr again, and feel that even it looks not comfortable, but
> make the lacp struct more meaning for 3ad, what do you think about it, I think no need
> to revert them to u8.

Personally, when I see things that are different, I start wondering about 
why.  So if there is no reason for it to be different, I would prefer that 
it is the same.

Certainly, a mac_addr type is more meaningful than just an array with size 
ETH_ALEN, or worse an array with size 6.  But I am not sure that it is 
practical to introduce that type everywhere.

In any case, it is not a big issue.

julia