[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAExDi1RODELLA+N4_5JS3LcDa5DN4q_imYwhw4hd4BHq1GFRBw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 11 May 2017 01:41:15 +0200
From: Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@...il.com>
To: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com>,
tpmdd-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@....de>,
Marcel Selhorst <tpmdd@...horst.net>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tpm: fix byte order related arithmetic inconsistency in tpm_getcap()
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 2:34 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen
<jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> Arithmetic should work but it's not a good practice to do additions,
> substractions or multiplications in any other byte order than the CPU
> byte order.
>
> sparse also complains about this.
>
> /Jarkko
Arithmetic should work?
let's try with 0x0080:
in native order: 0x0080 + 0x0080 = 0x0100
in reverse order: 0x8000 + 0x8000 = 0x0000 != swap16(0x0100)
Or do I misunderstand what you mean by "arithmetic should work"?
-- Luc Van Oostenryck
Powered by blists - more mailing lists