linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/8] staging: vt6655: Use incrementation in `idx`

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: <2fd61a94d8cacd2626364bd25eace6b141ad1766.camel@perches.com>
Date:   Thu, 04 Nov 2021 07:44:22 -0700
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
        Karolina Drobnik <karolinadrobnik@...il.com>
Cc:     outreachy-kernel@...glegroups.com, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
        forest@...ttletooquiet.net, linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/8] staging: vt6655: Use incrementation in `idx`

On Thu, 2021-11-04 at 16:00 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 01, 2021 at 02:32:00PM +0000, Karolina Drobnik wrote:
> > Increment `idx` in a loop instead of adding the loop counter
> > `i` to do so. Thanks to this change, the cast to unsigned short
> > can be removed.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Karolina Drobnik <karolinadrobnik@...il.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/staging/vt6655/rf.c | 16 ++++++++--------
> >  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/vt6655/rf.c b/drivers/staging/vt6655/rf.c
[]
> > @@ -700,11 +700,11 @@ bool RFvWriteWakeProgSyn(struct vnt_private *priv, unsigned char rf_type,
> >  			return false;
> >  
> >  		for (i = 0; i < CB_AL2230_INIT_SEQ; i++)
> > -			MACvSetMISCFifo(priv, (unsigned short)(idx + i), al2230_init_table[i]);
> > +			MACvSetMISCFifo(priv, idx++, al2230_init_table[i]);
> 
> Of course, idx is no longer a constant so declaring it as a variable
> makes sense here.  But maybe just do it in the same patch because the
> patch 1/1 doesn't make sense as a stand alone patch.
> 
> Also don't declare idx as an unsigned short.  It's better to declare it
> as a int so it just works like a normal number and you don't have to
> think about signedness bugs and wrapping and edge cases.

No, IMO it really should be a u16.
Look at the iowrite16() within the call to MACvSetMISCFifo.