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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Sun, 19 Feb 2017 20:20:02 +0100 (CET)
From:   Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
To:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
cc:     Arushi Singhal <arushisinghal19971997@...il.com>,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, outreachy-kernel@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [Outreachy kernel] Re: [PATCH 1/2] staging: ks7010: Unnecessary
 parentheses are removed.



On Sun, 19 Feb 2017, Joe Perches wrote:

> On Sun, 2017-02-19 at 19:58 +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > On Sun, 19 Feb 2017, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > On Sun, 2017-02-19 at 23:56 +0530, Arushi Singhal wrote:
> > > > Unnecessary parentheses should be avoided as reported by checkpatch.pl.
> > > > Remove unnecessary parentheses, as reported by checkpatch as are nicer
> > > > to read.For example:-
> > > > It's often nicer to read if &(foo[0]) is converted to foo like:
> > > >      memcpy(&(ap->bssid[0]), &(ap_info->bssid[0]), ETH_ALEN);
> > > >      memcpy(ap->bssid, ap_info->bssid, ETH_ALEN);
> > > []
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/ks7010/ks_hostif.c b/drivers/staging/ks7010/ks_hostif.c
> > > []
> > > > @@ -212,7 +212,7 @@ int get_ap_information(struct ks_wlan_private *priv, struct ap_info_t *ap_info,
> > > >  	memset(ap, 0, sizeof(struct local_ap_t));
> > > >
> > > >  	/* bssid */
> > > > -	memcpy(&(ap->bssid[0]), &(ap_info->bssid[0]), ETH_ALEN);
> > > > +	memcpy(&ap->bssid[0], &ap_info->bssid[0], ETH_ALEN);
> > >
> > > This code doesn't match the suggested style of
> > > your commit message.
> >
> > Is what is suggested in the commit message correct?  That is, is the 0th
> > element of an array always at the same address as a pointer to the array
> > itself?
>
> I think your wording is a little fuzzy.
>
> Assuming you mean not a pointer to the array,
> but the array itself, yes.

Yes, I mean the array itself,sorry.  Thanks.

Arushi, it would be good it you could make the change you proposed to
make.  The calls would look much more normal that way.

thanks,
julia

>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "outreachy-kernel" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to outreachy-kernel+unsubscribe@...glegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to outreachy-kernel@...glegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/outreachy-kernel/1487531915.2198.38.camel%40perches.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

Powered by blists - more mailing lists