linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] bitfield.h: add FIELD_MAX() and field

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:   Fri, 28 Feb 2020 12:37:14 -0600
From:   Alex Elder <elder@...aro.org>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc:     Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bitfield.h: add FIELD_MAX() and field_max()

On 2/28/20 12:33 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Feb 2020 12:06:09 -0600 Alex Elder wrote:
>> On 2/28/20 12:04 PM, Alex Elder wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> I find field_max() to be a good name for what I'm looking for.  
>>
>> Sorry I wanted to add this but clicked "send" too fast.
>>
>> Yes it's the same as field_mask(), but that name only *implies*
>> it is the same as the maximum value.  I mean, they're the same,
>> but the name I'm suggesting conveys its purpose better.
> 
> We got FIELD_FIT tho.. The comparison is part of the macro there, 
> and it catches negative values if they manage to sneak in.

Ahhh!  I was using the lower-case macros and it looks like there
isn't one (despite seeming to have all(?) of the others).

How would you feel about having field_fit() be a lower-case
equivalent of FIELD_FIT()?

					-Alex