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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1416270188.18197.16.camel@gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 17 Nov 2014 16:23:08 -0800
From:	Juston <juston.h.li@...il.com>
To:	Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.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 Tue, 2014-11-18 at 01:46 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> 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
> 
Seems to be the case. Looked at some old commits (2.6.17) and found
FMODE_EXEC was mainlined to allow lustre to be installed on a vanilla
kernel.
Since you pointed it out, if we are dealing with compatability with 
obselete kernels, __FMODE_EXEC was added later in 2.6.38. Wondering
if I should address the case where FMODE_EXEC is defined but 
__FMODE_EXEC isn't since I currently only check __FMODE_EXEC.

Regards,
Juston Li

--
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/