lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2011 22:32:12 -0700 From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> To: Julian Calaby <julian.calaby@...il.com> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, "Luis R. Rodriguez" <lrodriguez@...eros.com>, Jouni Malinen <jmalinen@...eros.com>, Vasanthakumar Thiagarajan <vasanth@...eros.com>, Senthil Balasubramanian <senthilkumar@...eros.com>, "John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>, Christian Lamparter <chunkeey@...glemail.com>, Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@...hat.com>, Wey-Yi Guy <wey-yi.w.guy@...el.com>, Intel Linux Wireless <ilw@...ux.intel.com>, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, ath9k-devel@...ts.ath9k.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] wireless: Remove casts of void * On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 15:23 +1000, Julian Calaby wrote: > Joe, Hi Julian. > On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 14:02, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote: > > Unnecessary casts of void * clutter the code. > > These are the remainder casts after several specific > > patches to remove netdev_priv and dev_priv. > You seem to have removed a lot of casts that don't relate to these cleanups. > In particular, some of the casts seem to relate more to documentation > rather than just changing pointer types to make the compiler happy. All of the cast removals are casts of void* types. I think none of of the casts are useful. None of them are required, all are duplicative. > In > particular, I'm referring to the casts describing the different usages > of data_buf in mwiflex, and around some pointer math in ath9k. Can you describe more in detail why you think these are documentary? This sort of cast: diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/mwifiex/11n.c b/drivers/net/wireless/mwifiex/11n.c @@ -191,7 +191,7 @@ int mwifiex_ret_11n_cfg(struct host_cmd_ds_command *resp, void *data_buf) struct host_cmd_ds_11n_cfg *htcfg = &resp->params.htcfg; if (data_buf) { - tx_cfg = (struct mwifiex_ds_11n_tx_cfg *) data_buf; + tx_cfg = data_buf; I think pretty useless. tx_cfg is a struct mwifiex_ds_11n_tx_cfg *. > Whilst I'm sure that the compiler is smart enough to handle automatic > casts between pointer types, some of these, in particular the mwiflex > bits, add some documentation to the code. I think not. Opinions of course can vary. cheers, Joe -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists