linux-kernel - Re: The sheer number of sparse warnings in the kernel

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: <1393463199.24588.54.camel@joe-AO722>
Date:	Wed, 26 Feb 2014 17:06:39 -0800
From:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: The sheer number of sparse warnings in the kernel

On Wed, 2014-02-26 at 16:51 -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 02/26/2014 04:48 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
> > err.h could also return bool instead of long for the
> > IS_ERR and IS_ERR_OR_NULL tests.
> 
> This is definitely true... although we should check that that doesn't
> make the code worse as this is used *all over* the kernel.

I tested using arch/x86/crypto/ x86-64 and 32
and there are no .o file differences using
bool or long via objdump -d new and old

> > Maybe something like this could be useful.
> > 
> > Shut up the unsigned<->signed pointer conversions
> > and implicit conversions in the Makefile.
> 
> Sounds like two separate patches to me.

Yeah, it was just for discussion.

I think gcc 4.8 is overly noisy about those 2.


--
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/