linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] staging: pi433: move get version func to where all other functions are

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:   Fri, 7 Jan 2022 11:53:44 +0300
From:   Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To:     Paulo Miguel Almeida <paulo.miguel.almeida.rodenas@...il.com>
Cc:     gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, realwakka@...il.com,
        linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] staging: pi433: move get version func to where all
 other functions are

On Fri, Jan 07, 2022 at 10:33:25AM +1300, Paulo Miguel Almeida wrote:
> As a convention for the pi433 driver, all routines that deals with the
> rf69 chip are defined in the rf69.c file.

That's some EnterpriseQuality[tm] style guidelines.  It's an over fussy
rule that just makes the code harder to read for no reason.

> While at it, the Version Register hardcoded value was replaced with a
> pre-existing constant in the driver.

This is good, though.

> diff --git a/drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c b/drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c
> index 68c09fa016ed..1372361d56e1 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c
> @@ -1116,9 +1116,7 @@ static int pi433_probe(struct spi_device *spi)
>  		spi->mode, spi->bits_per_word, spi->max_speed_hz);
>  
>  	/* Ping the chip by reading the version register */

This comment doesn't make sense now.

> -	retval = spi_w8r8(spi, 0x10);
> -	if (retval < 0)
> -		return retval;
> +	retval = rf69_get_version(spi);

Just say:

	retval = rf69_read_reg(spi, REG_VERSION);
	if (retval < 0)
		return retval;

Deleting the error handling was a bad style choice.  Also preserve the
error code.

regards,
dan carpenter