[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YHc68v7keeITnA3K@kroah.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2021 20:56:50 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] stm class: Replace uuid_t with plain u8 uuid[16]
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 08:47:48PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 07:33:38PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 08:12:46PM +0300, Alexander Shishkin wrote:
> > > From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
> > >
> > > It appears that uuid_t use in STM code abuses UUID API.
> >
> > How is it being abused?
>
> We are using it against the buffer that is u8, and neither uuid_t nor guid_t.
And how should it be used?
> > Moreover,
> > > this type is only useful when we parse user input. Due to above
> > > replace uuid_t with u8 uuid[16] and use uuid_t only when parse
> > > user input.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/hwtracing/stm/p_sys-t.c | 16 ++++++++++------
> > > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/hwtracing/stm/p_sys-t.c b/drivers/hwtracing/stm/p_sys-t.c
> > > index 360b5c03df95..04d13b3785d3 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/hwtracing/stm/p_sys-t.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/hwtracing/stm/p_sys-t.c
> > > @@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ enum sys_t_message_string_subtype {
> > > MIPI_SYST_SEVERITY(MAX))
> > >
> > > struct sys_t_policy_node {
> > > - uuid_t uuid;
> > > + u8 uuid[UUID_SIZE];
> >
> > This feels wrong, what is wrong with the uuid_t type usage here?
>
> Nothing, just will require additional export_uuid() / import_uuid() call.
Isn't that the "correct way" here?
> > > bool do_len;
> > > unsigned long ts_interval;
> > > unsigned long clocksync_interval;
> > > @@ -92,7 +92,7 @@ static void sys_t_policy_node_init(void *priv)
> > > {
> > > struct sys_t_policy_node *pn = priv;
> > >
> > > - generate_random_uuid(pn->uuid.b);
> >
> > Ok, that's not good, but that looks to be a flaw in the
> > generate_random_uuid() api, not this driver implementation.
> >
> > I don't understand why this change is needed?
>
> Using raw buffer APIs against uuid_t / guid_t.
So you want to do that, or you do not want to do that? Totally
confused,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists