linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: mdc: use __FMODE

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: <20141117224616.GI4905@mwanda>
Date:	Tue, 18 Nov 2014 01:46:16 +0300
From:	Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To:	Juston Li <juston.h.li@...il.com>
Cc:	oleg.drokin@...el.com, devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
	andreas.dilger@...el.com, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, HPDD-discuss@...1.01.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: mdc: use __FMODE_EXEC macro

On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 02:23:48PM -0800, Juston Li wrote:
> FMODE_EXEC is type fmode_t but is used in operations
> with integers which leads to sparse warnings:
> drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/mdc/mdc_lib.c:198:21: warning: restricted fmode_t degrades to integer
> drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/mdc/mdc_locks.c:300:49: warning: restricted fmode_t degrades to integer
> 
> Fix by using __FMODE_EXEC macro defined in fs.h.
> 
> Note the same warnings occurs with other fmode flags
> here but they don't have a corresponding int macro.
> 

When are FMODE_EXEC and __FMODE_EXEC not defined?  I think they're
always defined.  I don't understand the point of these ifdefs.  I guess
maybe they are for compatability with obsolete kernels?

regards,
dan carpenter

--
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/