linux-kernel - Re: -Wswitch Clang warnings in drivers/scsi

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:   Mon, 08 Oct 2018 11:47:09 -0700
From:   Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
To:     Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@...il.com>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
Cc:     "James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: -Wswitch Clang warnings in drivers/scsi

On Thu, 2018-10-04 at 23:57 -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> Regardless of how the overflow is handled within the switch statement,
> the overflow is also happening when passing in these values to the ioctl,
> right? I mean these case values are defined in the uapi files so that
> userspace can easily pass them in to the ioctl, meaning those values are
> being passed in as a signed integer and I would assume subsequently
> overflowing unless I'm just missing something here.

>From the user space header <sys/ioctl.h>:

extern int ioctl (int __fd, unsigned long int __request, ...) __THROW;

>From the kernel header <linux/fs.h>:

	long (*unlocked_ioctl) (struct file *, unsigned int, unsigned long);
	long (*compat_ioctl) (struct file *, unsigned int, unsigned long);

Why has the second argument been declared as "unsigned long" in the glibc
headers and as "unsigned int" in the kernel headers? That's not clear to me.

Bart.