netdev - Re: [PATCH mlx5-next v1 05/15] net/mlx5: Break encap/decap into two separated flow table creation flags

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: <CAJ3xEMjrrhjCRmnGyD4SYit+pgJpakXLSrF6i35qaZiDfGsAxw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 6 Sep 2018 00:37:17 +0300
From:   Or Gerlitz <gerlitz.or@...il.com>
To:     Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...lanox.com>
Cc:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>, Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
        RDMA mailing list <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ariel Levkovich <lariel@...lanox.com>,
        Mark Bloch <markb@...lanox.com>,
        Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>,
        Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>,
        linux-netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH mlx5-next v1 05/15] net/mlx5: Break encap/decap into two
 separated flow table creation flags

On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 9:11 PM, Leon Romanovsky  wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 10:38:00AM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 08:10:25AM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
>> > > > -       int en_encap_decap = !!(flags & MLX5_FLOW_TABLE_TUNNEL_EN);
>> > > > +       int en_encap = !!(flags & MLX5_FLOW_TABLE_TUNNEL_EN_ENCAP);
>> > > > +       int en_decap = !!(flags & MLX5_FLOW_TABLE_TUNNEL_EN_DECAP);
>> > >
>> > > Yuk, please don't use !!.
>> > >
>> > >   bool en_decap = flags & MLX5_FLOW_TABLE_TUNNEL_EN_DECAP;
>> >
>> > We need to provide en_encap and en_decap as an input to MLX5_SET(...)
>> > which is passed to FW as 0 or 1.
>> >
>> > Boolean type is declared in C as int and treated as zero for false
>> > and any other value for true,
>>
>> No, that isn't right, the kernel uses C99's _Bool intrinsic type, which
>> is guaranteed to only hold 0 or 1 by the compiler.
>>
>> See types.h:
>>
>> typedef _Bool                   bool;
>
> Exciting, it took me a while to find C99 standard and relevant 6.3.1.2.
> Anyway, this patch didn't change previous functionality, which used "!!"
> convention.

so? if we didn't do things properly prior to the patch, why not fixing it along
with the patch? lets fix