linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v2 5/7] ACPI / x86: introduce acpi_os

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: <36DF59CE26D8EE47B0655C516E9CE640286728CF@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Date:	Tue, 10 Nov 2015 13:56:49 +0000
From:	"Chen, Yu C" <yu.c.chen@...el.com>
To:	Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
CC:	"Zheng, Lv" <lv.zheng@...el.com>, Lv Zheng <zetalog@...il.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Wysocki, Rafael J" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
	"Brown, Len" <len.brown@...el.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 5/7] ACPI / x86: introduce acpi_os_readable() support

Hi, Shevchenko,
Thanks for you review

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andy Shevchenko [mailto:andy.shevchenko@...il.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2015 9:04 PM
> To: Chen, Yu C
> Cc: Zheng, Lv; Lv Zheng; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; linux-
> acpi@...r.kernel.org; Wysocki, Rafael J; Brown, Len
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/7] ACPI / x86: introduce acpi_os_readable() support
> 
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 11:42 AM, Chen, Yu C <yu.c.chen@...el.com> wrote:
> > Hi, Lv
> > Sorry for my late feedback on the patch, one minor nit below:
> 
> >> +     start_pfn = page_to_pfn(virt_to_page(pointer));
> >> +     end_pfn = page_to_pfn(virt_to_page(pointer + length));
> > Convert pointer to char* first?
> > end_pfn = page_to_pfn(virt_to_page((char*)pointer + length));
> 
> Why do you need that?
> void * + size_t = char * + size_t
> 
Hum, I was under impression it was a pointer, so I converted it to char* for safety,
but it seems a wrong impression,and I've just tested it on gcc, it is OK without
char*.

> --
> With Best Regards,
> Andy Shevchenko