linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 11/15] usb: serial: ipaq: use usb_control_msg

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:   Fri, 4 Dec 2020 11:21:06 +0100
From:   Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
To:     Himadri Pandya <himadrispandya@...il.com>
Cc:     johan@...nel.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
        linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel-mentees@...ts.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/15] usb: serial: ipaq: use usb_control_msg_send()

On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 12:16:59PM +0530, Himadri Pandya wrote:
> The new usb_control_msg_send() nicely wraps usb_control_msg() with proper
> error check. Hence use the wrapper instead of calling usb_control_msg()
> directly.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Himadri Pandya <himadrispandya@...il.com>
> ---
>  drivers/usb/serial/ipaq.c | 9 ++++-----
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/usb/serial/ipaq.c b/drivers/usb/serial/ipaq.c
> index f81746c3c26c..99505a76035d 100644
> --- a/drivers/usb/serial/ipaq.c
> +++ b/drivers/usb/serial/ipaq.c
> @@ -530,15 +530,14 @@ static int ipaq_open(struct tty_struct *tty,
>  	 */
>  	while (retries) {
>  		retries--;
> -		result = usb_control_msg(serial->dev,
> -				usb_sndctrlpipe(serial->dev, 0), 0x22, 0x21,
> -				0x1, 0, NULL, 0, 100);
> -		if (!result)
> +		result = usb_control_msg_send(serial->dev, 0, 0x22, 0x21, 0x1,
> +					      0, NULL, 0, 100, GFP_KERNEL);
> +		if (result == 0)
>  			break;

There's not point in using the new helper since there's no data stage
and usb_control_msg already returns negative errno or 0.

>  		msleep(1000);
>  	}
> -	if (!retries && result) {
> +	if (result) {
>  		dev_err(&port->dev, "%s - failed doing control urb, error %d\n",
>  							__func__, result);
>  		return result;

This looks like just an unrelated simplification of the logic; there was
never any need to check !retries here. You can send that as a clean up
patch of its own if you want.

Johan