linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next] net: lantiq_etop: add blank line after declaration

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:   Sat, 08 Jan 2022 00:04:08 -0800
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     Aleksander Jan Bajkowski <olek2@...pl>, davem@...emloft.net,
        kuba@...nel.org, rdunlap@...radead.org, jgg@...pe.ca,
        arnd@...db.de, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     John Crispin <john@...ozen.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: lantiq_etop: add blank line after
 declaration

(adding John Crispin, the original submitter of this driver)

On Tue, 2021-12-28 at 23:00 +0100, Aleksander Jan Bajkowski wrote:
> This patch adds a missing line after the declaration and
> fixes the checkpatch warning:
> 
> WARNING: Missing a blank line after declarations
> +		int desc;
> +		for (desc = 0; desc < LTQ_DESC_NUM; desc++)
> 
> Signed-off-by: Aleksander Jan Bajkowski <olek2@...pl>
[]
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/lantiq_etop.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/lantiq_etop.c
[]
> @@ -218,6 +218,7 @@ ltq_etop_free_channel(struct net_device *dev, struct ltq_etop_chan *ch)
>  		free_irq(ch->dma.irq, priv);
>  	if (IS_RX(ch->idx)) {
>  		int desc;
> +
>  		for (desc = 0; desc < LTQ_DESC_NUM; desc++)
>  			dev_kfree_skb_any(ch->skb[ch->dma.desc]);
>  	}

The change is innocuous and has already been applied but the code
doesn't seem to make sense.

Why is dev_kfree_skb_any called multiple times with the same argument?

Is there some missing logic here?  Maybe a missing ++?

Something like:

		for (desc = 0; desc < LTQ_DESC_NUM; desc++)
 			dev_kfree_skb_any(ch->skb[ch->dma.desc++]);

Dunno, but the current code seems wrong.