netdev - Re: [PATCH] net/8021q/vlan_dev.c

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: <1203383012.7181.102.camel@localhost>
Date:	Mon, 18 Feb 2008 17:03:32 -0800
From:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	kaber@...sh.net, bruno@...nktube.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	jgarzik@...ox.com, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
	linville@...driver.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/8021q/vlan_dev.c - Use print_mac

On Mon, 2008-02-18 at 16:50 -0800, David Miller wrote:
> Actually it seems the 'pure' attribute is more important
> here.  Although it's not semantically a perfect match,
> what we need to tell the compiler is basically that:
> 
> 1) the return value depends upon the inputs
> 2) if the input is not used, it's safe to avoid the call
> 
> and 'pure' accomplishes that without any unwanted side-effects.
> 
> I think this will not result in any unwanted over-optimization.
> Because if the inputs change in any way GCC has to emit the
> call.
> 
> Any objections?

Does this need to be done for all function calls
declared with __attribute__((format(printf, x, y)))
{
return 0;
}

ie: pr_debug, dev_dbg, dev_vdbg?

Perhaps it's more sensible to go back to

#ifdef DEBUG
#define pr_debug(fmt, arg...) do {} while (0)
#endif

and give up the printf argument verification

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html