linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 15/20] ethernet: ucc_geth: use UCC_GETH_{RX, TX}_BD_RING

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: <6844ad03-637f-86ab-6747-989cd44cccac@csgroup.eu>
Date:   Tue, 8 Dec 2020 16:14:31 +0100
From:   Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>
To:     Rasmus Villemoes <rasmus.villemoes@...vas.dk>,
        Li Yang <leoyang.li@....com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc:     Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, Zhao Qiang <qiang.zhao@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 15/20] ethernet: ucc_geth: use UCC_GETH_{RX,
 TX}_BD_RING_ALIGNMENT macros directly



Le 05/12/2020 à 20:17, Rasmus Villemoes a écrit :
> These macros both have the value 32, there's no point first
> initializing align to a lower value.
> 
> If anything, one could throw in a
> BUILD_BUG_ON(UCC_GETH_TX_BD_RING_ALIGNMENT < 4), but it's not worth it
> - lots of code depends on named constants having sensible values.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Rasmus Villemoes <rasmus.villemoes@...vas.dk>
> ---
>   drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/ucc_geth.c | 8 ++------
>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/ucc_geth.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/ucc_geth.c
> index 273342233bba..ccde42f547b8 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/ucc_geth.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/ucc_geth.c
> @@ -2196,9 +2196,7 @@ static int ucc_geth_alloc_tx(struct ucc_geth_private *ugeth)
>   		    UCC_GETH_TX_BD_RING_SIZE_MEMORY_ALIGNMENT)
>   			length += UCC_GETH_TX_BD_RING_SIZE_MEMORY_ALIGNMENT;
>   		if (uf_info->bd_mem_part == MEM_PART_SYSTEM) {
> -			u32 align = 4;
> -			if (UCC_GETH_TX_BD_RING_ALIGNMENT > 4)
> -				align = UCC_GETH_TX_BD_RING_ALIGNMENT;
> +			u32 align = UCC_GETH_TX_BD_RING_ALIGNMENT;

I think checkpatch.pl will expect an empty line here in addition.

>   			ugeth->tx_bd_ring_offset[j] =
>   				(u32) kmalloc((u32) (length + align), GFP_KERNEL);
>   
> @@ -2274,9 +2272,7 @@ static int ucc_geth_alloc_rx(struct ucc_geth_private *ugeth)
>   	for (j = 0; j < ug_info->numQueuesRx; j++) {
>   		length = ug_info->bdRingLenRx[j] * sizeof(struct qe_bd);
>   		if (uf_info->bd_mem_part == MEM_PART_SYSTEM) {
> -			u32 align = 4;
> -			if (UCC_GETH_RX_BD_RING_ALIGNMENT > 4)
> -				align = UCC_GETH_RX_BD_RING_ALIGNMENT;
> +			u32 align = UCC_GETH_RX_BD_RING_ALIGNMENT;

Same

>   			ugeth->rx_bd_ring_offset[j] =
>   				(u32) kmalloc((u32) (length + align), GFP_KERNEL);
>   			if (ugeth->rx_bd_ring_offset[j] != 0)
>