linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] serial: 8250: Let drivers request full 16550A feature probing

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]

Message-ID: <ec300579-9565-a96a-2e8e-a42363fd9ad7@kernel.org>
Date:   Mon, 19 Sep 2022 12:49:43 +0200
From:   Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>
To:     "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...am.me.uk>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
        Anders Blomdell <anders.blomdell@...trol.lth.se>,
        linux-serial@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] serial: 8250: Let drivers request full 16550A feature
 probing

On 19. 09. 22, 10:18, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Sep 2022, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> 
>>> --- linux-macro.orig/include/linux/serial_core.h
>>> +++ linux-macro/include/linux/serial_core.h
>>> @@ -414,7 +414,7 @@ struct uart_icount {
>>>    	__u32	buf_overrun;
>>>    };
>>>    -typedef unsigned int __bitwise upf_t;
>>> +typedef __u64 __bitwise upf_t;
>>
>> Why __u64 and not u64?
> 
>   For consistency as there's `__u32' used elsewhere in this file.  It's not
> clear to me what our rules WRT the use of `s*'/`u*' vs `__s*'/`__u*' are.
> I don't think we have it mentioned under Documentation/.  Please clarify
> if you know and I can update the change accordingly.

The rule is, AFAICT, use __u*/__s* in user (uapi) headers. Everywhere 
else, use u*/s*.

>>> @@ -522,6 +522,7 @@ struct uart_port {
>>>    #define UPF_FIXED_PORT		((__force upf_t) (1 << 29))
>>>    #define UPF_DEAD		((__force upf_t) (1 << 30))
>>>    #define UPF_IOREMAP		((__force upf_t) (1 << 31))
>>> +#define UPF_FULL_PROBE		((__force upf_t) (1ULL << 32))
>>
>> This looks like a perfect time to switch them all to BIT_ULL().
> 
>   Good point, I keep forgetting about that macro.  I'll keep this part
> unchanged for the purpose of backporting and add 3/3 to switch all the
> macros over.

OK.

thanks,
-- 
js
suse labs