linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] input: ps2-gpio: refactor struct ps2_gpio

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:   Tue, 15 Feb 2022 14:38:54 -0800
From:   Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
To:     Danilo Krummrich <danilokrummrich@...develop.de>
Cc:     linux-input@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linus.walleij@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] input: ps2-gpio: refactor struct ps2_gpio_data

On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 11:23:17PM +0100, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
> Hi Dmitry,
> 
> On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 01:54:46PM -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > Hi Danilo,
> > 
> > On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 05:02:05PM +0100, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
> > 
> > > +static inline struct ps2_gpio_data *
> > > +to_ps2_gpio_data(struct delayed_work *dwork)
> > > +{
> > > +	struct ps2_gpio_data_tx *txd = container_of(dwork,
> > > +						    struct ps2_gpio_data_tx,
> > > +						    work);
> > > +
> > > +	return container_of(txd, struct ps2_gpio_data, tx);
> > > +}
> > > +
> > >  static void ps2_gpio_tx_work_fn(struct work_struct *work)
> > >  {
> > >  	struct delayed_work *dwork = to_delayed_work(work);
> > > -	struct ps2_gpio_data *drvdata = container_of(dwork,
> > > -						    struct ps2_gpio_data,
> > > -						    tx_work);
> > 
> > This can simply be written as:
> > 
> > 	struct ps2_gpio_data *drvdata = container_of(dwork,
> > 						     struct ps2_gpio_data,
> > 						     tx.work);
> > 
> > No need to resubmit unless you disagree - I can change it on my side.
> Thanks, please do so.
> 
> The tx and rx members of struct ps2_gpio_data can then be anonymous structs.
> Do you mind changing that too? Or should I resubmit?

I will.

Thanks.

-- 
Dmitry