linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V4 1/3] mtd: add new fields to nand_flash

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: <1363180395.11441.57.camel@sauron.fi.intel.com>
Date:	Wed, 13 Mar 2013 15:13:15 +0200
From:	Artem Bityutskiy <artem.bityutskiy@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Huang Shijie <shijie8@...il.com>
Cc:	Huang Shijie <b32955@...escale.com>, dwmw2@...radead.org,
	computersforpeace@...il.com, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 1/3] mtd: add new fields to nand_flash_dev{}

On Wed, 2013-03-13 at 21:04 +0800, Huang Shijie wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 6:54 PM, Artem Bityutskiy
> <artem.bityutskiy@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2013-03-07 at 18:49 +0800, Huang Shijie wrote:
> >> diff --git a/include/linux/mtd/nand.h b/include/linux/mtd/nand.h
> >> index 591eeeb..f0a9d93 100644
> >> --- a/include/linux/mtd/nand.h
> >> +++ b/include/linux/mtd/nand.h
> >> @@ -578,6 +578,8 @@ struct nand_chip {
> >>   * @erasesize: eraseblock size in bytes (determined from the extended ID if 0)
> >>   * @chipsize: total chip size in MiB
> >>   * @options: stores various chip bit options
> >> + * @id_len: The valid length of the @id.
> >> + * @oobsize: OOB size
> >>   */
> >>  struct nand_flash_dev {
> >>       char *name;
> >> @@ -592,6 +594,8 @@ struct nand_flash_dev {
> >>       unsigned long chipsize;
> >>       unsigned long erasesize;
> >>       unsigned long options;
> >> +     unsigned long id_len;
> >> +     unsigned long oobsize;
> >>  };
> >
> > Why are these of type 'long', which is 64 bits in 64-bit architectures,
> > which seems to be unnecessarily big. Wouldn't 'unsigned int' be enough?
> >
> Frankly speaking, "uint16_t" is enough.
> "unsigned int" is too long for both the fields.

Adding a single uint16_t is useless because GCC will pad it to 32 bits
anyway. I send a patch which turns all the longs to ints. Just add
another int. And yes, do not add id_len unless you need it. Thanks!

-- 
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy

--
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/