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, 26 Oct 2020 18:10:45 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>
Cc:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>,
        Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] qspinlock: use signed temporaries for cmpxchg

On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 05:57:51PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
> 
> When building with W=2, the build log is flooded with
> 
> include/asm-generic/qrwlock.h:65:56: warning: pointer targets in passing argument 2 of 'atomic_try_cmpxchg_acquire' differ in signedness [-Wpointer-sign]
> include/asm-generic/qrwlock.h:92:53: warning: pointer targets in passing argument 2 of 'atomic_try_cmpxchg_acquire' differ in signedness [-Wpointer-sign]
> include/asm-generic/qspinlock.h:68:55: warning: pointer targets in passing argument 2 of 'atomic_try_cmpxchg_acquire' differ in signedness [-Wpointer-sign]
> include/asm-generic/qspinlock.h:82:52: warning: pointer targets in passing argument 2 of 'atomic_try_cmpxchg_acquire' differ in signedness [-Wpointer-sign]
> 
> The atomics are built on top of signed integers, but the caller
> doesn't actually care. Just use signed types as well.
> 

Yuck, no. This is actively wrong. All that code very much wants u32.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ