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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2019 13:02:31 +0100 From: Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com> To: Nicholas Mc Guire <der.herr@...r.at> CC: Nicholas Mc Guire <hofrat@...dl.org>, Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@...cle.com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>, <rds-devel@....oracle.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] rds: ib: force endiannes annotation On 29/04/2019 12:18, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote: > On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 12:00:06PM +0100, Edward Cree wrote: >> Again, a __force cast doesn't seem necessary here. It looks like the >> code is just using the wrong types; if all of src, dst and uncongested >> were __le64 instead of uint64_t, and the last two lines replaced with >> rds_cong_map_updated(map, le64_to_cpu(uncongested)); then the semantics >> would be kept with neither sparse errors nor __force. >> >> __force is almost never necessary and mostly just masks other bugs or >> endianness confusion in the surrounding code. Instead of adding a >> __force, either fix the code to be sparse-clean or leave the sparse >> warning in place so that future developers know there's something not >> right. >> > changing uncongested to __le64 is not an option here - it would only move > the sparse warnings to those other locatoins where the ports that > became uncongested are being or'ed into uncongested. That's why I say to change *src and *dst too. Sparse won't mind the conversion from void * to __le64 * when they're assigned, and the only operations we do on them... > uncongested |= ~(*src) & *dst; > *dst++ = *src++; ... are some bitwise ops on the values (bitwise ops are legal in any endianness) and incrementation of the pointers (which cares only about the pointee size, not type). -Ed
Powered by blists - more mailing lists