linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] IB/hfi1: Fix logical condition in msix_request

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20200125193652.GA30707@jggl>
Date:   Sat, 25 Jan 2020 15:36:52 -0400
From:   Jason <jgg@...pe.ca>
To:     Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@...il.com>
Cc:     Mike Marciniszyn <mike.marciniszyn@...el.com>,
        Dennis Dalessandro <dennis.dalessandro@...el.com>,
        Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] IB/hfi1: Fix logical condition in msix_request_irq

On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 03:26:58PM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> Clang warns:
> 
> drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/msix.c:136:22: warning: overlapping
> comparisons always evaluate to false [-Wtautological-overlap-compare]
>         if (type < IRQ_SDMA && type >= IRQ_OTHER)
>             ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 1 warning generated.
> 
> It is impossible for something to be less than 0 (IRQ_SDMA) and greater
> than or equal to 3 (IRQ_OTHER) at the same time. A logical OR should
> have been used to keep the same logic as before.
> 
> Link: https://github.com/ClangBuiltLinux/linux/issues/841
> Fixes: 13d2a8384bd9 ("IB/hfi1: Decouple IRQ name from type")
> Signed-off-by: Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@...il.com>
> Reviewed-by: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
> Acked-by: Dennis Dalessandro <dennis.dalessandro@...el.com>
> ---
>  drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/msix.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

Applied to for-next, thanks

Jason