netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2 6/9] ice: use <linux/packing.h> for Tx and Rx queue context data

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: <d0df4187-4ebb-4a28-aade-8e119a4b216c@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2024 09:32:54 -0800
From: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>
To: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>
CC: Daniel Machon <daniel.machon@...rochip.com>, Vladimir Oltean
	<olteanv@...il.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Eric Dumazet
	<edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni
	<pabeni@...hat.com>, Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>, "Przemek
 Kitszel" <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>, Masahiro Yamada
	<masahiroy@...nel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 6/9] ice: use <linux/packing.h> for Tx and Rx
 queue context data



On 10/31/2024 12:46 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2024 at 01:34:47PM -0700, Jacob Keller wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 10/30/2024 4:19 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
>>> Always just ignore the tool when it if it's not useful.
>>>
>>> CHECK_PACKED_FIELDS_ macros are just build time asserts, right?  I can easily
>>> just hard code Smatch to ignore CHECK_PACKED_FIELDS_* macros.  I'm just going to
>>> go ahead an do that in the ugliest way possible.  If we have a lot of these then
>>> I'll do it properly.
>>>
>>
>> We have 2 for ice, and likely a handful for some of the drivers Vladimir
>> is working on. More may happen in the future, but the number is likely
>> to unlikely to grow quickly.
>>
>> I was thinking of making them empty definitions if __CHECKER__, but
>> ignoring them in smatch would be easier on my end :D
>>
> 
> Adding them to __CHECKER__ works too.
Jakub suggested implementing the checks in modpost, which means the
CHECK_PACKED_FIELDS macros won't be merged.

I saw you did end up updating smatch to handle this, so wanted to let
you know it looks like it won't be necessary now.

Thanks,
Jake