linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] staging: r8188eu: Remove no more used functions and 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>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <2daf2287-e019-3be3-6627-b698bee6246b@lwfinger.net>
Date:   Fri, 30 Jul 2021 13:51:39 -0500
From:   Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net>
To:     "Fabio M. De Francesco" <fmdefrancesco@...il.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] staging: r8188eu: Remove no more used functions and
 variables

On 7/30/21 5:37 AM, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> Remove the functions and variables from rtw_security.c that are no more
> necessary since the patch that replaces getcrc32() with crc32_le().
> 
> Signed-off-by: Fabio M. De Francesco <fmdefrancesco@...il.com>
> ---
>   drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_security.c | 37 ---------------------
>   1 file changed, 37 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_security.c b/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_security.c
> index 9625beea4b3c..136ba1e61dca 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_security.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_security.c
> @@ -74,43 +74,6 @@ static void arcfour_encrypt(struct arc4context *parc4ctx, u8 *dest, u8 *src, u32
>   
>   }
>   
> -static int bcrc32initialized;
> -static u32 crc32_table[256];
> -
> -static u8 crc32_reverseBit(u8 data)
> -{
> -	return (u8)((data<<7)&0x80) | ((data<<5)&0x40) | ((data<<3)&0x20) |
> -		   ((data<<1)&0x10) | ((data>>1)&0x08) | ((data>>3)&0x04) |
> -		   ((data>>5)&0x02) | ((data>>7)&0x01);
> -}
> -
> -static void crc32_init(void)
> -{
> -	if (bcrc32initialized == 1) {
> -		return;
> -	} else {
> -		int i, j;
> -		u32 c;
> -		u8 *p = (u8 *)&c, *p1;
> -		u8 k;
> -
> -		c = 0x12340000;
> -
> -		for (i = 0; i < 256; ++i) {
> -			k = crc32_reverseBit((u8)i);
> -			for (c = ((u32)k) << 24, j = 8; j > 0; --j)
> -				c = c & 0x80000000 ? (c << 1) ^ CRC32_POLY : (c << 1);
> -			p1 = (u8 *)&crc32_table[i];
> -
> -			p1[0] = crc32_reverseBit(p[3]);
> -			p1[1] = crc32_reverseBit(p[2]);
> -			p1[2] = crc32_reverseBit(p[1]);
> -			p1[3] = crc32_reverseBit(p[0]);
> -		}
> -		bcrc32initialized = 1;
> -	}
> -}
> -
>   /*
>   	Need to consider the fragment  situation
>   */
> 

These two patches are

Tested-by: Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net>

Thanks for your contribution.

Larry