On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Dan Carpenter
wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 02:57:17PM +, Hammond, John wrote:
>> "{ NULL }" is valid ISO C, but unfortunately "{}" is not.
>
> In the kernel we don't care. We use lots of GCC extensions.
We depend on the compiler to do "incomplete zero-in
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 02:57:17PM +, Hammond, John wrote:
> "{ NULL }" is valid ISO C, but unfortunately "{}" is not.
In the kernel we don't care. We use lots of GCC extensions.
regards,
dan carpenter
___
devel mailing list
de...@linuxdriverproje
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 08:47:51AM -0800, Bruce Korb wrote:
> >
> > "{ NULL }" is valid ISO C, but unfortunately "{}" is not.
>
> Just make the thing "static const" and don't use an initializer.
That also works, of course.
regards,
dan carpenter
___
de
>
> "{ NULL }" is valid ISO C, but unfortunately "{}" is not.
Just make the thing "static const" and don't use an initializer.
___
devel mailing list
de...@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 08:47:50AM -0800, Bruce Korb wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 8:22 AM, James Simmons
> > >> --- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_flock.c
> > >> +++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_flock.c
> > >> @@ -143,7 +143,7 @@ static int ldlm_process_flock_lock(st
On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 04:22:58PM +, James Simmons wrote:
>
> > Prepare to mark sensitive kernel structures for randomization by making
> > sure they're using designated initializers. These were identified during
> > allyesconfig builds of x86, arm, and arm64, with most initializer fixes
> >
On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 08:47:50AM -0800, Bruce Korb wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 8:22 AM, James Simmons
> >> --- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_flock.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_flock.c
> >> @@ -143,7 +143,7 @@ static int ldlm_process_flock_lock(struct ldlm_
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 8:22 AM, James Simmons
> >> --- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_flock.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_flock.c
> >> @@ -143,7 +143,7 @@ static int ldlm_process_flock_lock(struct ldlm_lock
> >> *req, __u64 *flags,
> >> int added = (mode
016 10:22:58 AM
> To: Kees Cook
> Cc: de...@driverdev.osuosl.org; Greg Kroah-Hartman;
> linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org; Oleg Drokin; Vitaly
> Fertman; Bruce Korb; Emoly Liu; lustre-de...@lists.lustre.org
> Subject: Re: [lustre-devel] [PATCH] staging: lustre: ldlm: use designated
>
On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 8:22 AM, James Simmons
>> --- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_flock.c
>> +++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_flock.c
>> @@ -143,7 +143,7 @@ static int ldlm_process_flock_lock(struct ldlm_lock
>> *req, __u64 *flags,
>> int added = (mode == LCK_NL);
> Prepare to mark sensitive kernel structures for randomization by making
> sure they're using designated initializers. These were identified during
> allyesconfig builds of x86, arm, and arm64, with most initializer fixes
> extracted from grsecurity.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook
> ---
> driver
Prepare to mark sensitive kernel structures for randomization by making
sure they're using designated initializers. These were identified during
allyesconfig builds of x86, arm, and arm64, with most initializer fixes
extracted from grsecurity.
Signed-off-by: Kees Cook
---
drivers/staging/lustre/
12 matches
Mail list logo
