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: <CAHp75VfdDUooc=zy2rk8ep0PdsEsD1TGbaD9nm8DBB1NmYYTTw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 13 Feb 2018 20:29:21 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <garsilva@...eddedor.com>
Cc:     Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI/ASPM: Use 64-bit arithmetic instead of 32-bit

On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 6:59 PM, Gustavo A. R. Silva
<garsilva@...eddedor.com> wrote:
> Add suffix ULL to constant 1000 in order to give the compiler complete
> information about the proper arithmetic to use. Notice that this
> constant is used in a context that expects an expression of type
> u64 (64 bits, unsigned).
>
> The expression threshold_us * 1000 is currently being evaluated
> using 32-bit arithmetic.

> -       u64 threshold_ns = threshold_us * 1000;
> +       u64 threshold_ns = threshold_us * 1000ULL;

Shouldn't be other way around, i.e.

(u64)threshold_us ?

But still the question. have you checked all callers? Does it even makes sense?

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ