netdev - Re: [PATCH] gianfar: Fix warnings when built on 64-bit

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 29 Jul 2015 23:04:46 +0200
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	Scott Wood <scottwood@...escale.com>
Cc:	linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@...escale.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gianfar: Fix warnings when built on 64-bit

On Wednesday 29 July 2015 11:02:41 Scott Wood wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-07-29 at 10:02 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Wednesday 29 July 2015 00:24:37 Scott Wood wrote:
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_PM
> > >  static void lock_tx_qs(struct gfar_private *priv)
> > >  {
> > >     int i;
> > > @@ -580,6 +581,7 @@ static void unlock_tx_qs(struct gfar_private *priv)
> > >     for (i = 0; i < priv->num_tx_queues; i++)
> > >             spin_unlock(&priv->tx_queue[i]->txlock);
> > >  }
> > > +#endif
> > >  
> > 
> > This seems unrelated and should probably be a separate fix.
> 
> It's related in that it fixes a warning -- the 64-bit build didn't have 
> CONFIG_PM -- though I should have been clearer about that in the changelog.

Yes, that's what I meant: you can easily have a 32-bit build without
CONFIG_PM of course, and that would have the same problem.

> > 
> > You are fixing two problems here: the warning about a size cast, and
> > the fact that the driver is using the wrong pointer. I'd suggest
> > explaining it in the changelog.
> > 
> > Note that we normally rely on void pointer arithmetic in the kernel, so
> > I'd write it without the uintptr_t casts as 
> > 
> >       bdp_dma = lower_32_bits(rx_queue->rx_bd_dma_base + (base - bdp));
> 
> But those aren't void pointers, and rx_bd_dma_base isn't a pointer, so you'd 
> get the wrong answer doing that.

Ah, right.

	Arnd
--
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