Re: [Stable-review] [24/28] USB: xhci - fix unsafe macrodefinitions

[Sarah Sharp]

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 01:34:35PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-04-20 at 07:39 +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 03:02:04AM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2011-04-19 at 13:31 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > > > 2.6.32-longterm review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
> > > > 
> > > > ------------------
> > > > 
> > > > From: Dmitry Torokhov <dtor@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > 
> > > > commit 5a6c2f3ff039154872ce597952f8b8900ea0d732 upstream.
> > > > 
> > > > Macro arguments used in expressions need to be enclosed in parenthesis
> > > > to avoid unpleasant surprises.
> > > 
> > > Do you know of any specific uses of these macros where the missing
> > > parentheses caused 'unpleasant surprises'?
> > 
> > In my opinion, this type of fix should be backported even if the current
> > code does not appear to be at risk, otherwise a later fix in the kernel
> > could cause a serious regression when backported to -stable. For instance,
> > if we later have to backport this patch (cut'n'pasted) :
> [...]
> 
> I agree, but would like to know whether there is an immediate effect.

No immediate breakage, AFAIK.  Dmitry found the issue by inspection.

Sarah Sharp
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/