linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] 8250: Fix oops from setserial

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]

Message-Id: <20090530014311.93577673.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Sat, 30 May 2009 01:43:11 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc:	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	vvscore@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] 8250: Fix oops from setserial

On Sat, 30 May 2009 09:25:57 +0100 Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:

> > 
> > >  static void set_io_from_upio(struct uart_port *p)
> > >  {
> > > +	struct uart_8250_port *up = (struct uart_8250_port *)p;
> > 
> > container_of() is nicer, IMO.  It's clearer, and doesn't require that
> > the uart_port be the fist member.
> 
> See the rest of the driver - it was written that way years ago and this
> is just following the existing design.

Sure, huge numbers of drivers use the cast.

But I've never seen past sinnings as being a reason to continue sinning. 
Doing new code the right way doesn't result in worse code, and reduces
the chances of someone copying and pasting the wrong way.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/