linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 30/47] serial: ucc_uart: factor out soft

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: <73337067-953c-55e2-986a-24116fb10544@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
Date:   Thu, 14 Nov 2019 10:00:07 +0100
From:   Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>
To:     Timur Tabi <timur@...nel.org>
Cc:     Qiang Zhao <qiang.zhao@....com>, Li Yang <leoyang.li@....com>,
        Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr>,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Scott Wood <oss@...error.net>, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 30/47] serial: ucc_uart: factor out soft_uart
 initialization

On 14/11/2019 06.14, Timur Tabi wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 7:03 AM Rasmus Villemoes
> <linux@...musvillemoes.dk> wrote:
>>
>> -       /*
>> -        * Determine if we need Soft-UART mode
>> -        */
>>         if (of_find_property(np, "soft-uart", NULL)) {
>>                 dev_dbg(&ofdev->dev, "using Soft-UART mode\n");
>>                 soft_uart = 1;
>> +       } else {
>> +               return 0;
>>         }
> 
> How about:
> 
> if (!of_find_property(np, "soft-uart", NULL))
>     return 0;

of_property_read_bool() if anything. But I didn't want to do that kind
of transformation - just a pure "move this code out and fix the
indentation" with the minor edits needed to hook it back up where it
came from.

> And I think you should be able to get rid of the "soft_uart" variable.

Eh, no, it's used in several other places in the driver. I kind of hope
gcc is smart enough to see that in the !PPC32 case it is a static,
never-assigned-to, never-escapes variable so all the "if (soft_uart)"
branches go away, but that's not really very important.

Rasmus