linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] asoc: soc-core: fix coccinelle warnings

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]

Message-ID: <20140224054010.GY25940@sirena.org.uk>
Date:	Mon, 24 Feb 2014 14:40:10 +0900
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:	Nenghua Cao <nhcao@...vell.com>
Cc:	Liam Girdwood <liam.r.girdwood@...ux.intel.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] asoc: soc-core: fix coccinelle warnings

On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 11:05:14AM +0800, Nenghua Cao wrote:
> On 02/22/2014 10:52 AM, Mark Brown wrote:

> > type changes.  What coccinelle was suggesting here was to replace with a
> > simple assingment statement rather than change the argument within the
> > memcpy(), I think this stops the warning showing because of that issue

>       I am not familiar with coccinelle. But it isn't reasonable and
> convenient to use simple assignment instead of memcpy() here. So let's
> retain it. I will submit another patch to fix "Assignment of bool to
> 0/1" issue. How do you think about it?

Well, the two should be separate patches anyway but it's totally
reasonable to do an assigment - what it's telling you is that with
modern C "a = b" is valid even if a and b are structs.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)