linux-kernel - Re: [tip:x86/urgent] x86/io: Define readq()/writeq() to use 64-bit type

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]

Date:   Sat, 31 Mar 2018 15:06:41 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kbuild test robot <lkp@...el.com>, sohil.mehta@...el.com,
        mitake@....info.waseda.ac.jp, linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [tip:x86/urgent] x86/io: Define readq()/writeq() to use 64-bit type

On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 1:22 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> * Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:
>
>> > As of today I don't see this in linux-next
>> >
>> > % git tag --contains 0fc8483b69862
>> > next-20180214
>> > next-20180215
>> > next-20180216
>> >
>> > What happened to this change?
>>
>> Hm, so it's a real mystery: I merged it, then removed it 1.5 days later without
>> reporting anything. According to the Git log timestamp the removal happened late
>> at night, so maybe it was a tired typo?
>
> So just a few seconds after sending this I remembered why I zapped it: it was a
> Sparse failure reported by the kbuild-test robot.
>
> Here's the report:
>
>   [tip:x86/urgent 14/14] drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v1.c:1690:22: sparse: incorrect type in argument 1 (different base types)
>
> Since you were on Cc: of that report I assumed you'd take care of it.

Ah, yes. This one I fixed.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko