linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] staging: rtl8192u: Corrects 'Avoid CamelCase' for variables

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

Date:   Wed, 18 Mar 2020 10:57:11 -0700
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     Camylla Cantanheide <c.cantanheide@...il.com>,
        dan.carpenter@...cle.com
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        lkcamp@...ts.libreplanetbr.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] staging: rtl8192u: Corrects 'Avoid CamelCase' for
 variables

On Wed, 2020-03-18 at 14:31 -0300, Camylla Cantanheide wrote:
> Dear Dan Carpenter and Joe Perches,
> 
> Thank you very much for the suggestions, I found the evaluation of both
> very significant. Now, I have another perspective on variables.
> 
> I solved the problem for the *setKey *function, however, when executing the
> checkpatch, more *Checks* of the same type appeared.
> 
> Should I send the second version of the patch, only to the *setKey*
> function or do I resolve all *Checks* for the entire file?

A single patch refactoring the function would be fine.

Also perhaps a name change as a separate patch later as
setKey is a relatively generic name and not obviously
specific to the rtl8192u..

Perhaps a first refactoring patch like the below
then a renaming one.

(untested)
---
 drivers/staging/rtl8192u/r8192U_core.c | 50 ++++++++++++++++------------------
 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8192u/r8192U_core.c b/drivers/staging/rtl8192u/r8192U_core.c
index 89dd1fb..0c0cb08 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/rtl8192u/r8192U_core.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8192u/r8192U_core.c
@@ -4880,7 +4880,7 @@ void EnableHWSecurityConfig8192(struct net_device *dev)
 void setKey(struct net_device *dev, u8 EntryNo, u8 KeyIndex, u16 KeyType,
 	    u8 *MacAddr, u8 DefaultKey, u32 *KeyContent)
 {
-	u32 TargetCommand = 0;
+	u32 TargetCommand = CAM_CONTENT_COUNT * EntryNo |  BIT(31) | BIT(16);
 	u32 TargetContent = 0;
 	u16 usConfig = 0;
 	u8 i;
@@ -4897,32 +4897,28 @@ void setKey(struct net_device *dev, u8 EntryNo, u8 KeyIndex, u16 KeyType,
 	else
 		usConfig |= BIT(15) | (KeyType << 2) | KeyIndex;
 
-	for (i = 0; i < CAM_CONTENT_COUNT; i++) {
-		TargetCommand  = i + CAM_CONTENT_COUNT * EntryNo;
-		TargetCommand |= BIT(31) | BIT(16);
-
-		if (i == 0) { /* MAC|Config */
-			TargetContent = (u32)(*(MacAddr + 0)) << 16 |
-					(u32)(*(MacAddr + 1)) << 24 |
-					(u32)usConfig;
-
-			write_nic_dword(dev, WCAMI, TargetContent);
-			write_nic_dword(dev, RWCAM, TargetCommand);
-		} else if (i == 1) { /* MAC */
-			TargetContent = (u32)(*(MacAddr + 2))	 |
-					(u32)(*(MacAddr + 3)) <<  8 |
-					(u32)(*(MacAddr + 4)) << 16 |
-					(u32)(*(MacAddr + 5)) << 24;
-			write_nic_dword(dev, WCAMI, TargetContent);
-			write_nic_dword(dev, RWCAM, TargetCommand);
-		} else {
-			/* Key Material */
-			if (KeyContent) {
-				write_nic_dword(dev, WCAMI,
-						*(KeyContent + i - 2));
-				write_nic_dword(dev, RWCAM, TargetCommand);
-			}
-		}
+	TargetContent = MacAddr[0] << 16 |
+			MacAddr[0] << 24 |
+			(u32)usConfig;
+
+	write_nic_dword(dev, WCAMI, TargetContent);
+	write_nic_dword(dev, RWCAM, TargetCommand++);
+
+	 /* MAC */
+	TargetContent = MacAddr[2]	 |
+			MacAddr[3] <<  8 |
+			MacAddr[4] << 16 |
+			MacAddr[5] << 24;
+	write_nic_dword(dev, WCAMI, TargetContent);
+	write_nic_dword(dev, RWCAM, TargetCommand++);
+
+	/* Key Material */
+	if (!KeyContent)
+		return;
+
+	for (i = 2; i < CAM_CONTENT_COUNT; i++) {
+		write_nic_dword(dev, WCAMI, *KeyContent++);
+		write_nic_dword(dev, RWCAM, TargetCommand++);
 	}
 }