Re: [0/8] target-iSCSI: Adjustments for several function implementations

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



>> Can a passed null pointer really work in this function?
>>
>> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v4.16-rc2/source/include/crypto/hash.h#L684
>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/include/crypto/hash.h?id=0f9da844d87796ac31b04e81ee95e155e9043132#n751
>>
>> static inline struct crypto_tfm *crypto_shash_tfm(struct crypto_shash *tfm)
>> {
>> 	return &tfm->base;
>> }
> 
> Yes.  It's not a dereference,

Do any processors treat the zero address still special there?


> it's just doing pointer math to get the address.

Can eventually happen anything unexpected?


Can it be nicer to avoid such a software behaviour concern generally
just by adjusting a few jump labels (as I proposed it)?

Regards,
Markus



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [SCSI Target Devel]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Kernel Newbies]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Linux IIO]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux