Re: [PATCH] rose: correct integer overflow check

[Ralf Baechle]

On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 04:03:16PM -0500, Insu Yun wrote:

> 
>     Because of the types on the right hand side of the comparison
>     the expressions are all promoted to unsigned.
> 
>     Did you look at the compiler's assembler output?  I did when
>     reviewing your patch.
> 
> 
> I checked the assembler output right now.
> You are right.
> I realized that right hand side becomes unsigned due to sizeof.
> I think this patch is wrong. 
> Thanks. 

On a different level, the current whole approach of ROSE to just generate
a fixed number of devices at initialization time of ROSE is if not wrong
then at least very archaic.  The default number is 10 devices and probably
of those 9 are unused on a typical setup - that is, if the module has
been loaded intentionally at all.

As a solution I've implemented a patch to support creating of ROSE
devices through netlink plus the necessary changes to iproute2 to go
along with that.

  Ralf