netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 3/3] dsa: bmc_sf2: Pass GENMASK() signed bits

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <3e6a8859-1481-04c9-d3bc-1cfd0db2ff4a@gmail.com>
Date:   Sun, 5 Jul 2020 13:39:56 -0700
From:   Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 3/3] dsa: bmc_sf2: Pass GENMASK() signed bits



On 7/5/2020 1:36 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> Oddly, GENMASK() requires signed bit numbers, so that it can compare
> them for < 0. If passed an unsigned type, we get warnings about the
> test never being true. There is no danger of overflow here, udf is
> always a u8, so there is plenty of space when expanding to an int.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>

Likewise for this patch, the subject should be:

net: dsa: bcm_sf2: Pass GENMASK() signed bits

(not the typo on bmc_sf2 vs. bcm_sf2), with that fixed:

Reviewed-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
-- 
Florian