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  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]
Date:	Sat, 5 Jul 2014 21:25:52 +0100 (BST)
From:	"Maciej W. Rozycki" <>
To:	Joe Perches <>
cc:	Grant Likely <>,
	David Miller <>,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] declance: Fix 64-bit compilation warnings

On Sat, 5 Jul 2014, Joe Perches wrote:

> > > I don't think %#p is valid so it
> > > shouldn't have been set by #.
> > 
> >  Huh?  As recently as last Wednesday you pointed me at the specific commit 
> > from Grant that made it valid (GCC format complaints aside).
> Those gcc complaints are precisely the thing
> that makes it invalid.

 So enforce that in code then, clear the SPECIAL flag where appropriate 
and do not try to handle it in one place while leaving other ones to 
behave randomly (i.e. a supposedly fixed field width varies depending on 
the two uppermost digits).  Please note that it's only your proposed 
change that introduces that randomness, right now code does what's 
supposed and documented to, except a bit inconsistently.

> I believe you're tilting at windmills.
> Hey, it works sometimes.  Knock yourself out.

 I pointed out an inconsistency with the intent to propose a fix once a 
consensus have been reached, one way or another.  And I think shifting the 
inconsistency to a different place, which is what your proposal does, 
isn't really a complete solution, although I do recognise the improvement.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists