linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] staging: kpc2000: kpc2000

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20190609110711.GA5666@kroah.com>
Date:   Sun, 9 Jun 2019 13:07:11 +0200
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Geordan Neukum <gneukum1@...il.com>
Cc:     Hao Xu <haoxu.linuxkernel@...il.com>, devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] staging: kpc2000: kpc2000_i2c: void* -> void *

On Sat, Jun 08, 2019 at 01:45:05PM +0000, Geordan Neukum wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 08, 2019 at 03:27:46PM +0800, Hao Xu wrote:
> > modify void* to void * for #define inb_p(a) readq((void*)a)
> > and #define outb_p(d,a) writeq(d,(void*)a)
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Hao Xu <haoxu.linuxkernel@...il.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/staging/kpc2000/kpc2000_i2c.c | 4 ++--
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/kpc2000/kpc2000_i2c.c b/drivers/staging/kpc2000/kpc2000_i2c.c
> > index a434dd0..de3a0c8 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/kpc2000/kpc2000_i2c.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/kpc2000/kpc2000_i2c.c
> > @@ -124,9 +124,9 @@ struct i2c_device {
> >  
> >  // FIXME!
> >  #undef inb_p
> > -#define inb_p(a) readq((void*)a)
> > +#define inb_p(a) readq((void *)a)
> >  #undef outb_p
> > -#define outb_p(d,a) writeq(d,(void*)a)
> > +#define outb_p(d,a) writeq(d,(void *)a)
> 
> Alternatively to fixing up the style here, did you consider just
> removing these two macros altogether and calling [read|write]q
> directly throughout the kpc_i2c driver (per the '//FIXME' comment)?
> 
> Unless, I'm misunderstanding something, these macros are shadowing the
> functions [in|out]b_p, which already exist in io.h. [in|out]b_p are for
> 8-bit i/o transactions and [read|write]q are for 64-bit transactions, so
> shadowing the original [in|out]b_p with something that actually does
> 64-bit transactions is probably potentially misleading here.

Yes, these should be fixed up "properly".  But I'll take the coding
style cleanups for now.

thanks,

greg k-h