linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/6] serial: uartps: Do not initialize field to zero again

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: <20180627234836.GA1691@kroah.com>
Date:   Thu, 28 Jun 2018 07:48:36 +0800
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>
Cc:     Michal Simek <monstr@...str.eu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk, Alexander Graf <agraf@...e.de>,
        shubhraj@...inx.com, robh@...nel.org, Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.com>,
        linux-serial@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/6] serial: uartps: Do not initialize field to
 zero again

On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 04:19:46PM +0200, Michal Simek wrote:
> On 27.6.2018 12:09, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 10:09:05AM +0200, Michal Simek wrote:
> >> On 6.6.2018 14:41, Michal Simek wrote:
> >>> Writing zero and NULLs to already initialized fields is not needed.
> >>> Remove this additional writes.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>
> >>> ---
> >>>
> >>> Changes in v2:
> >>> - new patch - it can be sent separately too
> >>>
> >>>  drivers/tty/serial/xilinx_uartps.c | 3 ---
> >>>  1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/xilinx_uartps.c b/drivers/tty/serial/xilinx_uartps.c
> >>> index 8a3e34234e98..5f116f3ecd4a 100644
> >>> --- a/drivers/tty/serial/xilinx_uartps.c
> >>> +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/xilinx_uartps.c
> >>> @@ -1510,15 +1510,12 @@ static int cdns_uart_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >>>  
> >>>  	/* At this point, we've got an empty uart_port struct, initialize it */
> >>>  	spin_lock_init(&port->lock);
> >>> -	port->membase	= NULL;
> >>> -	port->irq	= 0;
> >>>  	port->type	= PORT_UNKNOWN;
> >>>  	port->iotype	= UPIO_MEM32;
> >>>  	port->flags	= UPF_BOOT_AUTOCONF;
> >>>  	port->ops	= &cdns_uart_ops;
> >>>  	port->fifosize	= CDNS_UART_FIFO_SIZE;
> >>>  	port->line	= id;
> >>> -	port->dev	= NULL;
> >>>  
> >>>  	/*
> >>>  	 * Register the port.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Alan, Rob, Greg: Any comment about this RFC?
> > 
> > I rarely review RFC patchesets as obviously you don't think it is good
> > enough to be submitted "for real" :)
> 
> There is one missing minor part but I want to review concept first
> because I didn't find any driver which is using this style.
> 
> > If you think this is all good, great, please resend it without the RFC
> > and it will end up in my queue.
> 
> I will definitely do it but please look at the concept itself because I
> would like to use this with at least 3 other drivers.

I don't have the time right now to review "concepts", sorry.

greg k-h