linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH net-next] r8152: simply the arguments

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, 16 Mar 2017 14:28:07 +0000
From:   David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To:     'Hayes Wang' <hayeswang@...ltek.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
CC:     "nic_swsd@...ltek.com" <nic_swsd@...ltek.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-usb@...r.kernel.org" <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net-next] r8152: simply the arguments

From: Hayes Wang
> Sent: 16 March 2017 06:28
> Replace &tp->napi with napi and tp->netdev with netdev.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Hayes Wang <hayeswang@...ltek.com>
> ---
>  drivers/net/usb/r8152.c | 44 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
>  1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/usb/r8152.c b/drivers/net/usb/r8152.c
> index 227e1fd..e480e9f 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/usb/r8152.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/usb/r8152.c
> @@ -1761,6 +1761,7 @@ static int rx_bottom(struct r8152 *tp, int budget)
>  	unsigned long flags;
>  	struct list_head *cursor, *next, rx_queue;
>  	int ret = 0, work_done = 0;
> +	struct napi_struct *napi = &tp->napi;
> 
>  	if (!skb_queue_empty(&tp->rx_queue)) {
>  		while (work_done < budget) {
> @@ -1773,7 +1774,7 @@ static int rx_bottom(struct r8152 *tp, int budget)
>  				break;
> 
>  			pkt_len = skb->len;
> -			napi_gro_receive(&tp->napi, skb);
> +			napi_gro_receive(napi, skb);
...

I'm not sure this makes the code any more readable.
It isn't even needed to shorten any long lines.

If you are really lucky the compiler will optimise it away.
Otherwise it will generate another local variable and possibly
a register spill to stack.

	David