linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH mm] tracing: incorrect gfp

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sun, 8 May 2022 21:37:18 +0100
From:   Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Vasily Averin <vvs@...nvz.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, kernel@...nvz.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH mm] tracing: incorrect gfp_t conversion

On Sat, May 07, 2022 at 04:00:10PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sat, 7 May 2022 15:48:35 -0700 Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> 
> > I did the below.
> > 
> 
> Silly me, doesn't work.
> 
> > 
> > --- a/include/trace/events/mmflags.h~tracing-incorrect-gfp_t-conversion-fix
> > +++ a/include/trace/events/mmflags.h
> > @@ -13,53 +13,57 @@
> >   * Thus most bits set go first.
> >   */
> >  
> > +#define FUL __force unsigned long
> > +
> >  #define __def_gfpflag_names						\
> > -	{(__force unsigned long)GFP_TRANSHUGE,		"GFP_TRANSHUGE"},	\
> 
> Can't expand FUL here within the macro definition.

Can we do something even better?

#define GFP_NAME(flag) { (__force unsigned long)flag, #flag },

... with one or more layers of indirection to satisfy the arcane
rules of C macros?