linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] staging: r8188eu: remove RT_TRACE and DBG_88E prints from ioctl

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:   Wed, 4 Aug 2021 16:12:15 +0300
From:   Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To:     Martin Kaiser <martin@...ser.cx>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net>,
        Phillip Potter <phil@...lpotter.co.uk>,
        linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: r8188eu: remove RT_TRACE and DBG_88E prints
 from ioctl_linux.c

On Mon, Aug 02, 2021 at 09:39:17AM +0200, Martin Kaiser wrote:
> @@ -4203,7 +3940,6 @@ static int rtw_dbg_port(struct net_device *dev,
>  			u16 start_value = 0;
>  			u32 write_num = extra_arg;
>  			int i;
> -			u8 final;
>  			struct xmit_frame	*xmit_frame;
>  
>  			xmit_frame = rtw_IOL_accquire_xmit_frame(padapter);
> @@ -4216,12 +3952,6 @@ static int rtw_dbg_port(struct net_device *dev,
>  				rtw_IOL_append_WB_cmd(xmit_frame, reg, i+start_value, 0xFF);
>  			if (_SUCCESS != rtw_IOL_exec_cmds_sync(padapter, xmit_frame, 5000, 0))
>  				ret = -EPERM;
> -
> -			final = rtw_read8(padapter, reg);
> -			if (start_value+write_num-1 == final)
> -				DBG_88E("continuous IOL_CMD_WB_REG to 0x%x %u times Success, start:%u, final:%u\n", reg, write_num, start_value, final);
> -			else
> -				DBG_88E("continuous IOL_CMD_WB_REG to 0x%x %u times Fail, start:%u, final:%u\n", reg, write_num, start_value, final);
>  		}

I don't have a problem with the patch but these tests don't make any
sense now that we don't print a Success/Fail at the end.  (We should
probably delete the whole function and all the related code)

regards,
dan carpenter