netdev - Re: >Re: [RFC] should VM_BUG_ON(cond) really evaluate cond

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: <CA+55aFyGEhBMv31QXN7q9PJc36TVtHLOvdFYB1+6NTo+nKSkbQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sun, 30 Oct 2011 10:07:36 -0700
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: >Re: [RFC] should VM_BUG_ON(cond) really evaluate cond

On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 8:16 AM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
>
> Because it doesnt work if x is const.

Just remove the const. Problem solved.

Both cases of 'const' are totally arbitrary and useless. The
test_bit() one is literally a cast to const (admittedly also *from*
const, but nobody cares), and the atomic_read() one is just because it
uses a silly inline function where a macro would be simpler.

                              Linus
--
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