Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 23:42:13 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 23:42:03 -0400 Received: from [216.101.162.242] ([216.101.162.242]:5760 "EHLO pizda.ninka.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 23:41:58 -0400 From: "David S. Miller" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15196.61008.690839.396406@pizda.ninka.net> Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 20:41:04 -0700 (PDT) To: "Albert D. Cahalan" Cc: chris@scary.beasts.org (Chris Evans), linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Minor net/core/sock.c security issue? In-Reply-To: <200107240302.f6O32iB279266@saturn.cs.uml.edu> In-Reply-To: <15196.45004.237634.928656@pizda.ninka.net> <200107240302.f6O32iB279266@saturn.cs.uml.edu> X-Mailer: VM 6.75 under 21.1 (patch 13) "Crater Lake" XEmacs Lucid Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing Albert D. Cahalan writes: > Long term, __builtin_min() and __builtin_max() would be nice. I would even avoid this, what is the signedness of their arguments and return values? The answer is: I don't care, because I have to look it up. And if I have to look it up, I know that most people _won't_ look it up and will just guess or assume. Most people are therefore likely to misuse it. Later, David S. Miller davem@redhat.com - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/