netdev - Re: [PATCH 01/15] net: wireless: ath: use | instead of + for summing bitmasks

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 22 Oct 2015 23:52:27 +0530
From:	punit vara <punitvara@...il.com>
To:	Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>
Cc:	Kalle Valo <kvalo@....qualcomm.com>, stas.yakovlev@...il.com,
	chaoming_li@...lsil.com.cn,
	Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net>,
	Christian Lamparter <chunkeey@...glemail.com>,
	sgruszka@...hat.com, brudley@...adcom.com, arend@...adcom.com,
	John Linville <linville@...driver.com>, jirislaby@...il.com,
	Nick Kossifidis <mickflemm@...il.com>, mcgrof@...not-panic.com,
	Eugene Krasnikov <k.eugene.e@...il.com>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	brcm80211-dev-list@...adcom.com, wcn36xx@...ts.infradead.org,
	"Berg, Johannes" <johannes.berg@...el.com>, meuleman@...adcom.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/15] net: wireless: ath: use | instead of + for summing bitmasks

On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 3:13 AM, Sergei Shtylyov
<sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com> wrote:
> Hello.
>
> On 10/21/2015 05:55 PM, Punit Vara wrote:
>
>> This patch is to the ath10k/pci.h file that fixes following warning
>
>
>    pci.c, you mean?
>
>
>>   reported by coccicheck:
>>
>> WARNING: sum of probable bitmasks, consider |
>>
>> I have replaced + with OR operator | for summing bitmasks
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Punit Vara <punitvara@...il.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/pci.c | 10 +++++-----
>>   1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/pci.c
>> b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/pci.c
>> index 1046ab6..165a318 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/pci.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/pci.c
>> @@ -775,7 +775,7 @@ static u32 ath10k_pci_targ_cpu_to_ce_addr(struct
>> ath10k *ar, u32 addr)
>>         switch (ar->hw_rev) {
>>         case ATH10K_HW_QCA988X:
>>         case ATH10K_HW_QCA6174:
>> -               val = (ath10k_pci_read32(ar, SOC_CORE_BASE_ADDRESS +
>> +               val = (ath10k_pci_read32(ar, SOC_CORE_BASE_ADDRESS |
>>                                           CORE_CTRL_ADDRESS) &
>>                        0x7ff) << 21;
>>                 break;
>> @@ -1443,10 +1443,10 @@ static void ath10k_pci_irq_msi_fw_mask(struct
>> ath10k *ar)
>>         switch (ar->hw_rev) {
>>         case ATH10K_HW_QCA988X:
>>         case ATH10K_HW_QCA6174:
>> -               val = ath10k_pci_read32(ar, SOC_CORE_BASE_ADDRESS +
>> +               val = ath10k_pci_read32(ar, SOC_CORE_BASE_ADDRESS |
>>                                         CORE_CTRL_ADDRESS);
>>                 val &= ~CORE_CTRL_PCIE_REG_31_MASK;
>> -               ath10k_pci_write32(ar, SOC_CORE_BASE_ADDRESS +
>> +               ath10k_pci_write32(ar, SOC_CORE_BASE_ADDRESS |
>
>
>    Don't think these 2 are justified.
>
>
>> @@ -1464,10 +1464,10 @@ static void ath10k_pci_irq_msi_fw_unmask(struct
>> ath10k *ar)
>>         switch (ar->hw_rev) {
>>         case ATH10K_HW_QCA988X:
>>         case ATH10K_HW_QCA6174:
>> -               val = ath10k_pci_read32(ar, SOC_CORE_BASE_ADDRESS +
>> +               val = ath10k_pci_read32(ar, SOC_CORE_BASE_ADDRESS |
>>                                         CORE_CTRL_ADDRESS);
>>                 val |= CORE_CTRL_PCIE_REG_31_MASK;
>> -               ath10k_pci_write32(ar, SOC_CORE_BASE_ADDRESS +
>> +               ath10k_pci_write32(ar, SOC_CORE_BASE_ADDRESS |
>>                                    CORE_CTRL_ADDRESS, val);
>
>
>    And these too.
>
> [...]
>
> MBR, Sergei
>

 CORE_CTRL_ADDRESS is 0x0000 so it will not mask .. these patch should
be rejected ...I have modified by looking at coccicheck .Actually
First time I have used that tool  I do know it can also generate false
warning sometime .I have experience about checkpatch.pl ..Sorry for
this patch rest I have resend
--
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