linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC] staging: fieldbus: anybus-s: use proper type for wait_for_completion

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: <20190427111748.GA3157@osadl.at>
Date:   Sat, 27 Apr 2019 13:17:48 +0200
From:   Nicholas Mc Guire <der.herr@...r.at>
To:     Sven Van Asbroeck <thesven73@...il.com>
Cc:     Nicholas Mc Guire <hofrat@...dl.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] staging: fieldbus: anybus-s: use proper type for
 wait_for_completion_timeout

On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 03:20:54AM -0400, Sven Van Asbroeck wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 3:01 AM Nicholas Mc Guire <der.herr@...r.at> wrote:
> > > > (some unrelated sparse warnings (cast to restricted __be16))
> > >
> > > That sounds interesting too. Could you provide more details?
> >
> > make C=1
> > drivers/staging/fieldbus/anybuss/host.c:1350:25: warning: cast to restricted __be16
> > drivers/staging/fieldbus/anybuss/host.c:1350:25: warning: cast to restricted __be16
> > drivers/staging/fieldbus/anybuss/host.c:1350:25: warning: cast to restricted __be16
> > drivers/staging/fieldbus/anybuss/host.c:1350:25: warning: cast to restricted __be16
> > drivers/staging/fieldbus/anybuss/host.c:1350:25: warning: cast to restricted
> 
> regmap_bulk_read(cd->regmap, REG_FIELDBUS_TYPE, &fieldbus_type,
i>         sizeof(fieldbus_type));
> fieldbus_type = be16_to_cpu(fieldbus_type);
> 
> Probably because the parameter to be16_to_cpu() should be __be16.
> Would you like to spin a separate patch for this too? Or shall I?

so the issue is simply that the endiannes anotatoin is missing even 
though the conversion is being done - with other words there is no code
lvel funcitonal bug here but rather sparse needs the anotation to verify
correctness and that is missing. Just want to make sure I understand
this before I try to "fix" a sparse warning.

thx!
hofrat