Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Tue, 18 Oct 2022 23:57:39 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
To:     "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>
Cc:     linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Stanislaw Gruszka <stf_xl@wp.pl>,
        Helmut Schaa <helmut.schaa@googlemail.com>,
        Kalle Valo <kvalo@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] wifi: rt2x00: use explicitly signed type for clamping
Message-ID: <Y08TQwcY3zL3kGHR@smile.fi.intel.com>
References: <202210190108.ESC3pc3D-lkp@intel.com>
 <20221018202734.140489-1-Jason@zx2c4.com>
 <Y08PVnsTw75sHfbg@smile.fi.intel.com>
 <Y08SGz/xGSN87ynk@zx2c4.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Y08SGz/xGSN87ynk@zx2c4.com>
Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 02:52:43PM -0600, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 11:40:54PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 02:27:34PM -0600, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> > > On some platforms, `char` is unsigned, which makes casting -7 to char
> > > overflow, which in turn makes the clamping operation bogus. Instead,
> > > deal with an explicit `s8` type, so that the comparison is always
> > > signed, and return an s8 result from the function as well. Note that
> > > this function's result is assigned to a `short`, which is always signed.
> > 
> > Why not to use short? See my patch I just sent.
> 
> Trying to have the most minimal change here that doesn't rock the boat.
> I'm not out to rewrite the driver. I don't know the original author's
> rationales. This patch here is correct and will generate the same code
> as before on architectures where it wasn't broken.
> 
> However, if you want your "change the codegen" patch to be taken
> seriously, you should probably send it to the wireless maintainers like
> this one, and they can decide. Personally, I don't really care either
> way.

I have checked the code paths there and I found no evidence that short can't be
used. That's why my patch.

Okay, I will formally send it to the corresponding maintainers.

But if they want, they can always download this thread using `b4` tool and at
least comment on it.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko