netdev - Re: [PATCH v4 45/47] net/wan/fsl_ucc_hdlc: reject muram offsets above 64K

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

Message-ID: <3db19b28-90a4-f204-07b3-517cfd44010b@kernel.org>
Date:   Fri, 15 Nov 2019 08:33:52 -0600
From:   Timur Tabi <timur@...nel.org>
To:     Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>
Cc:     Qiang Zhao <qiang.zhao@....com>, Li Yang <leoyang.li@....com>,
        Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr>,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Scott Wood <oss@...error.net>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 45/47] net/wan/fsl_ucc_hdlc: reject muram offsets above
 64K

On 11/15/19 1:44 AM, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
> I can change it, sure, but it's a matter of taste. To me the above asks
> "does the value change when it is truncated to a u16" which makes
> perfect sense when the value is next used with iowrite16be(). Using a
> comparison to U16_MAX takes more brain cycles for me, because I have to
> think whether it should be > or >=, and are there some
> signedness/integer promotion business interfering with that test.

Ok.