linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] treewide conversion to sizeof

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: <8ad884f80c538efabc5c2442517c75c9@perches.com>
Date:   Sun, 08 Dec 2019 17:40:26 -0600
From:   joe@...ches.com
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Pankaj Bharadiya <pankaj.laxminarayan.bharadiya@...el.com>,
        Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] treewide conversion to sizeof_member() for v5.5-rc1

On 2019-12-08 17:19, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> maybe it's
> the 13-year old in me, but "sizeof_member()" just makes me go "that's
> puerile.

The 13 year old in you could grow up one day.  Most 13 year olds don't 
even know that word btw.

> I _can_ see why we'd want to standardize on one of the tree versions
> we have, but I can't really see the problem with the existing #define
> that we have, and that is used (admittedly not all that much):
> sizeof_field()

Call it what the standard calls it.