linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 06/14] software node: get rid of property_set

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:   Wed, 11 Sep 2019 12:21:42 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
Cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Platform Driver <platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 06/14] software node: get rid of property_set_pointer()

On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 01:37:25AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 11:29:10AM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 8:15 AM Dmitry Torokhov
> > <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Instead of explicitly setting values of integer types when copying
> > > property entries lets just copy entire value union when processing
> > > non-array values.
> > >
> > > When handling array values assign the pointer there using the newly
> > > introduced "raw" pointer union member. This allows us to remove
> > > property_set_pointer().
> > >
> > > In property_get_pointer() we do not need to handle each data type
> > > separately, we can simply return either the raw pointer or pointer to
> > > values union.
> > 
> > Same as before, typechecking is good thing to have for my point of view.
> > Others may have different opinions.
> 
> OK, I'll just point out that typechecking is a red herring here as
> everything was and still is accessed through void pointers, and we
> trusted the type set on property. Users of static properties should use
> PROPERTY_ENTRY_XXX() for initialization and do not poke into struct
> property_entry directly.
> 
> I suppose it is up to Rafael to decide here.

Yes, and perhaps Mika as they were the main authors of the idea and
implementation.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko