linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] tty: n

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:   Mon, 18 May 2020 09:48:03 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Gregory CLEMENT <gregory.clement@...tlin.com>
Cc:     Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] tty: n_gsm: Improve debug output

On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 09:44:52AM +0200, Gregory CLEMENT wrote:
> Hello Greg,
> 
> > On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 09:33:57AM +0200, Gregory CLEMENT wrote:
> >> Hello Jiri,
> >> 
> >> > On 12. 05. 20, 13:53, Gregory CLEMENT wrote:
> >> >> Use appropriate print helpers for debug messages.
> >> >> 
> >> >> Signed-off-by: Gregory CLEMENT <gregory.clement@...tlin.com>
> >> >> ---
> >> >>  drivers/tty/n_gsm.c | 14 ++------------
> >> >>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> >> >> 
> >> >> diff --git a/drivers/tty/n_gsm.c b/drivers/tty/n_gsm.c
> >> >> index d77ed82a4840..67c8f8173023 100644
> >> >> --- a/drivers/tty/n_gsm.c
> >> >> +++ b/drivers/tty/n_gsm.c
> >> >> @@ -504,18 +504,8 @@ static void gsm_print_packet(const char *hdr, int addr, int cr,
> >> >>  	else
> >> >>  		pr_cont("(F)");
> >> >>  
> >> >> -	if (dlen) {
> >> >> -		int ct = 0;
> >> >> -		while (dlen--) {
> >> >> -			if (ct % 8 == 0) {
> >> >> -				pr_cont("\n");
> >> >> -				pr_debug("    ");
> >> >> -			}
> >> >> -			pr_cont("%02X ", *data++);
> >> >> -			ct++;
> >> >> -		}
> >> >> -	}
> >> >> -	pr_cont("\n");
> >> >> +	if (dlen)
> >> >
> >> > This test is superfluous. print_hex_dump_* won't write anything when
> >> > zero length is passed to it.
> >> 
> >> As I will send a v3 due to the issue found on the last patch, I am also
> >> going to fix this.
> >
> > Ugh, as I already applied this series, should I just revert them all, or
> > are you going to send fix-ups on top of what I have applied instead?
> 
> I was about to send a new series, but I can just send fix-ups. It's up
> to you.

fix-ups are less work for me :)