linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8 00/19] staging: r8188eu: shorten and simplify calls chains

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:   Mon, 20 Sep 2021 16:06:03 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     "Fabio M. De Francesco" <fmdefrancesco@...il.com>
Cc:     Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net>,
        Phillip Potter <phil@...lpotter.co.uk>,
        Pavel Skripkin <paskripkin@...il.com>,
        linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        David Laight <david.Laight@...lab.com>,
        Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
        Martin Kaiser <martin@...ser.cx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 00/19] staging: r8188eu: shorten and simplify calls
 chains

On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 03:44:53PM +0200, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> On Monday, September 20, 2021 1:55:42 PM CEST Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 01:53:37AM +0200, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> > > --- Preface ---
> > > 
> > > This is v8 of "shorten and simplify calls chain". The first 14 patches
> > > have already been applied to staging-testing, so we have been requested
> > > to reset the numbering of the remaining patches to 01/19, while 
> discarding
> > > from this new submission the above-mentioned 14 patches (otherwise we 
> would 
> > > have submitted a series containing 33 patches).
> > > 
> > > The following commit message is provided as it was in v7, both for the 
> > > purpose of presenting the whole picture to Maintainers, Reviewers, and to 
> > > anybody else who may be interested in knowing the entire design and the
> > > evolution since v1 to the current v8.
> > > 
> > > --- Commit message ---
> > > 
> > > io_ops abstraction is useless in this driver, since there is only one ops
> > > registration. Without io_ops we can get rid of indirect calls mess and
> > > shorten the calls chain.
> > > 
> > > Shorten the calls chain of rtw_read8/16/32() down to the actual reads.
> > > For this purpose unify the three usb_read8/16/32 into the new
> > > usb_read(); make the latter parameterizable with 'size'; embed most of
> > > the code of usbctrl_vendorreq() into usb_read() and use in it the new
> > > usb_control_msg_recv() API of USB Core.
> > > 
> > > Shorten the calls chain of rtw_write8/16/32() down to the actual writes.
> > > For this purpose unify the four usb_write8/16/32/N() into the new
> > > usb_write(); make the latter parameterizable with 'size'; embed most of
> > > the code of usbctrl_vendorreq() into usb_write() and use in it the new
> > > usb_control_msg_send() API of USB Core.
> > > 
> > > The code with the modifications was thoroughly tested by Pavel Skripkin
> > > using a TP-Link TL-WN722N v2 / v3 [Realtek RTL8188EUS] and by Fabio M.
> > > De Francesco using a ASUSTek Computer, Inc. Realtek 8188EUS [USB-N10 
> Nano].
> > > 
> > > --- Changelog ---
> > > 
> > > v7->v8 (old numbering):
> > > 	- 1-14:
> > > 		Patches applied to staging-testing, so they are 
> dropped
> > > 		from the current v8;
> > > 
> > > 	- 15-19:
> > > 		Split into 19 patches. Numbering reset to 01. After 
> this
> > > 		reset, 15-19/19 become 01-19/19 (so we have a total of 
> 33
> > > 		patches in this series. 
> > 
> > Better, still needs a bit more work.  I took 2 of these to shorten your
> > load a bit :)
> >
> Thanks, Greg. I've already seen that you took those other 2 from the series. 
> We are about half way to destination: 14 + 2 already taken. :)
> 
> I've not replied to the other messages of yours because they are easy to 
> understand, fix or change commit messages, and resend as v9.
> 
> Instead I'm replying to this particular message because I'm not able to see 
> where "a bit more work" is needed.

The "bit more work" was my review comments on the patches.

thanks,

greg k-h