Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1539274203.2623.56.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20181011203126.15338-1-ndesaulniers@google.com>
 <f83893d2-ed9b-613f-2768-1a975d28fe8b@gmail.com> <1539356751.2656.5.camel@linux.ibm.com>
 <fc23168b-7275-bae0-6039-04e261b3cbad@gmail.com> <CAKwvOdmStDm3Lz=W7XjmB7f7ihe4hLOmaBRLOrStbkBMRKwdjA@mail.gmail.com>
 <80837c90-0425-aadd-38d7-c3c866d29a0a@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <80837c90-0425-aadd-38d7-c3c866d29a0a@gmail.com>
From:   Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>
Date:   Fri, 12 Oct 2018 11:39:47 -0700
Message-ID: <CAKwvOdmL0kkZs7m+F5eXutVNqs0tjpKcKy-O4N8+-F2FOkL9gQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KEYS: trusted: fix -Wvarags warning
To:     denkenz@gmail.com
Cc:     jejb@linux.ibm.com, dhowells@redhat.com,
        Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@gmail.com>,
        Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>, zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
        jmorris@namei.org, serge@hallyn.com,
        linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, keyrings@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 10:27 AM Denis Kenzior <denkenz@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Nick,
>
> >> So maybe I'm misunderstanding something, but the issue seems to be that
> >> unsigned char is promoted to 'unsigned char *' by Clang and probably
> >> unsigned int or int by gcc.
> >
> > No. This is extremely well defined behavior in C.  In C, integral
> > types are NEVER promoted to pointer to integer types, only to larger
> > integral types through rules more complicated than the correct flags
> > to pass to `tar`.
> > https://xkcd.com/1168/
> >
>
> Ah right.  Thanks for the correction.  So looks like bool won't work for
> the same reasons.  But unsigned int should work right?  But then again
> this is a boolean value and if we want to be paranoid we can simply
> tweak the 'c = h3' assignment to be something like:
>
> c = !!h3;
>
> So in the end, I'm happy with int or unsigned int.

Thanks for the feedback.  I'll wait wait to see if James is also cool
with that approach, and if so, send a v2 based on the next-keys branch
in the security tree as per Nathan, with yours and his Suggested-by
tags.

-- 
Thanks,
~Nick Desaulniers