linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] gpio: clamp returned values to the boolean range

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:	Tue, 04 Mar 2014 19:09:19 -0800
From:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc:	Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@...il.com>,
	Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@...dia.com>,
	"linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpio: clamp returned values to the boolean range

On Wed, 2014-03-05 at 10:33 +0800, Linus Walleij wrote:
> the local "value" variable in the function should still be
> converted to a bool as well right? And the assignment should still
> be "false" not 0. So I would still add my hunk of code...

No idea.  I don't know the code, just wanted to point
out that a bool is not an int.

Generically, I think converting an int to a bool in
any "raw" function probably isn't the right thing to do.

Especially if any of these GPIOs are ever used as ports
(aggregates) in any access.

--
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/