netdev - Re: [PATCH] net-ipv4-tcp.c-fix-warning-from-older-compilers.patch

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: <4B226590.6030608@gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 11 Dec 2009 10:30:24 -0500
From:	William Allen Simpson <william.allen.simpson@...il.com>
To:	Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
CC:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, davem@...emloft.net,
	Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net-ipv4-tcp.c-fix-warning-from-older-compilers.patch

Ben Hutchings wrote:
> You can use BUILD_BUG_ON() to ensure that remains true.
> 
Another fine undocumented Linux Kernel feature.  In the absence of
standardized functions that check for buffer overruns, that's just
the ticket!

Kinda the opposite conditional of static assert, but I'm pretty sure
static assert wasn't working in gcc until a year or so ago.  That's
why I used the more old-fashioned test instead.  I'd no idea those
triggered a warning in some versions of gcc -- I never trusted 4.0.x,
and had plenty of problems with 4.1.x, too.

Thanks, I'll resubmit.
--
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