linux-kernel - Re: [net-next PATCH v3 1/1] atm: remove deprecated use of pci api

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: <54B91BD1.70909@gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 16 Jan 2015 15:10:25 +0100
From:	Quentin Lambert <lambert.quentin@...il.com>
To:	chas williams - CONTRACTOR <chas@....nrl.navy.mil>,
	David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
CC:	'David Miller' <davem@...emloft.net>,
	"linux-atm-general@...ts.sourceforge.net" 
	<linux-atm-general@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH v3 1/1] atm: remove deprecated use of pci api


On 16/01/2015 14:57, chas williams - CONTRACTOR wrote:
>
> Signed-off-by: Chas Williams - CONTRACTOR <chas@....nrl.navy.mil>
> ---
>   drivers/atm/eni.c       |  33 +++++++------
>   drivers/atm/fore200e.c  |  22 +++++----
>   drivers/atm/he.c        | 125 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------------
>   drivers/atm/he.h        |   4 +-
>   drivers/atm/idt77252.c  | 107 ++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------
>   drivers/atm/iphase.c    |  54 +++++++++++----------
>   drivers/atm/lanai.c     |  14 ++----
>   drivers/atm/nicstar.c   |  60 +++++++++++------------
>   drivers/atm/solos-pci.c |  26 +++++-----
>   drivers/atm/zatm.c      |  17 ++++---
>   10 files changed, 243 insertions(+), 219 deletions(-)
>
[]
> diff --git a/drivers/atm/fore200e.c b/drivers/atm/fore200e.c
> index d5d9eaf..75dde90 100644
> --- a/drivers/atm/fore200e.c
> +++ b/drivers/atm/fore200e.c
> @@ -425,7 +425,7 @@ static void fore200e_pca_write(u32 val, volatile u32 __iomem *addr)
>   static u32
>   fore200e_pca_dma_map(struct fore200e* fore200e, void* virt_addr, int size, int direction)
>   {
> -    u32 dma_addr = pci_map_single((struct pci_dev*)fore200e->bus_dev, virt_addr, size, direction);
> +    u32 dma_addr = dma_map_single(&((struct pci_dev *) fore200e->bus_dev)->dev, virt_addr, size, direction);
>   
>       DPRINTK(3, "PCI DVMA mapping: virt_addr = 0x%p, size = %d, direction = %d,  --> dma_addr = 0x%08x\n",
>   	    virt_addr, size, direction, dma_addr);
>
[]

I am going try to make similar changes in some other part of the kernel and
I was wondering if you could explain how you decided it wasn't necessary to
check for "((struct pci_dev *) fore200e->bus_dev" nullity for instance.

Thanks,

Quentin
--
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/