linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] staging: vt6656: Use ARRAY_SIZE instead of define RATE

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:   Mon, 6 Apr 2020 18:27:42 +0200
From:   Oscar Carter <oscar.carter@....com>
To:     Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
Cc:     Forest Bond <forest@...ttletooquiet.net>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, Malcolm Priestley <tvboxspy@...il.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] staging: vt6656: Use ARRAY_SIZE instead of define
 RATE_54M

On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 at 02:13:23PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 04, 2020 at 04:13:58PM +0200, Oscar Carter wrote:
> > Use ARRAY_SIZE to replace the define RATE_54M so we will never have a
> > mismatch. In this way, avoid the possibility of a buffer overflow if
> > this define is changed in the future to a greater value.
> >
>
> Future proofing is not really a valid reason to change this.

Ok, then I leave it as is.

> We have to assume that future programmers are not idiots.
>
That was not my intention. I'm sorry.

> The only valid reason to do this is readability, but I'm not convinced
> the new version is more readable.
>
Ok.

> regards,
> dan carpenter
>
Thanks,
oscar carter