linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] phy: allwinner: Fix GENMASK misuse

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <2367894118ccee058ed451927412d7c1a33864bd.camel@perches.com>
Date:   Thu, 07 Nov 2019 17:46:14 -0800
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     Russell King - ARM Linux admin <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Rikard Falkeborn <rikard.falkeborn@...il.com>
Cc:     megous@...ous.com, mark.rutland@....com,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, arnd@...db.de,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        mripard@...nel.org, kishon@...com, paul.kocialkowski@...tlin.com,
        linux-sunxi@...glegroups.com, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        tglx@...utronix.de, wens@...e.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, icenowy@...c.io
Subject: Re: [PATCH] phy: allwinner: Fix GENMASK misuse

On Thu, 2019-11-07 at 23:39 +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 07, 2019 at 09:46:45PM +0100, Rikard Falkeborn wrote:
> > Arguments are supposed to be ordered high then low.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Rikard Falkeborn <rikard.falkeborn@...il.com>
> > ---
> > Spotted while trying to add compile time checks of GENMASK arguments.
> > Patch has only been compile tested.
> 
> My feeling, personally, is that GENMASK() really isn't worth the pain
> it causes.  Can we instead get rid of this thing and just use easier
> to understand and less error-prone hex masks please?
> 
> I don't care what anyone else says, personally I'm going to stick with
> using hex masks as I find them way easier to get right first time than
> a problematical opaque macro - and I really don't want the effort of
> finding out that I've got the arguments wrong when I build it.  It's
> just _way_ easier and less error prone to use a hex mask straight off.

I agree, but there are already more than 8000 uses of this rather
silly (and perhaps backwards argument order) macro in the kernel.