linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v10 1/3] lib: Add strongly typed 64bit int

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAKv63uvTSLM8Q_u-wZJHceM7FtwNLC40oKDo1aBdWHxjeU-zbA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 15 Jan 2018 09:17:40 +0100
From:   Crt Mori <cmo@...exis.com>
To:     David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
        Ian Abbott <abbotti@....co.uk>,
        Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net>,
        Niklas Soderlund <niklas.soderlund+renesas@...natech.se>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
        Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-iio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-iio@...r.kernel.org>,
        Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 1/3] lib: Add strongly typed 64bit int_sqrt

On 12 January 2018 at 10:41, David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com> wrote:
> From: Crt Mori [mailto:cmo@...exis.com]
>> Sent: 09 January 2018 15:18
>>
>> It has been some time now since this moved. I have decided not to use
>> David's implementation because I want to maintain also range above
>> 2^62
>
> The last version I did supported the full range.

Nothing changed below that comment, so I was assuming it is not
supported (or did I miss a mail?).

Also fls discussion had opposite opinions or it just seems inconclusive to me?

>
>         David
>

So you all agree David Laight version is much better and should be
used instead of currently proposed version?