linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/4] staging: r8188eu: reformat long computation lines

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: <Y01iLXp20G0FSJFG@kroah.com>
Date:   Mon, 17 Oct 2022 16:09:49 +0200
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Deepak R Varma <drv@...lo.com>
Cc:     outreachy@...ts.linux.dev, Larry.Finger@...inger.net,
        phil@...lpotter.co.uk, paskripkin@...il.com,
        linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kumarpraveen@...ux.microsoft.com, saurabh.truth@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] staging: r8188eu: reformat long computation lines

On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 06:52:50PM +0530, Deepak R Varma wrote:
> Reformat long running computation instructions to improve code readability.
> Address following checkpatch script complaints:
> 	CHECK: line length of 171 exceeds 100 columns
> 	CHECK: line length of 113 exceeds 100 columns
> 
> Signed-off-by: Deepak R Varma <drv@...lo.com>
> ---
>  drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_br_ext.c | 20 +++++++++++++-------
>  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_br_ext.c b/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_br_ext.c
> index 79daf8f269d6..427da7e8ba4c 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_br_ext.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_br_ext.c
> @@ -211,8 +211,10 @@ static int __nat25_network_hash(unsigned char *network_addr)
>  	} else if (network_addr[0] == NAT25_IPX) {
>  		unsigned long x;
> 
> -		x = network_addr[1] ^ network_addr[2] ^ network_addr[3] ^ network_addr[4] ^ network_addr[5] ^
> -			network_addr[6] ^ network_addr[7] ^ network_addr[8] ^ network_addr[9] ^ network_addr[10];
> +		x = network_addr[1] ^ network_addr[2] ^ network_addr[3] ^

Why not go out to [4] here and then you are one line shorter?

> +		    network_addr[4] ^ network_addr[5] ^ network_addr[6] ^
> +		    network_addr[7] ^ network_addr[8] ^ network_addr[9] ^
> +		    network_addr[10];
> 
>  		return x & (NAT25_HASH_SIZE - 1);
>  	} else if (network_addr[0] == NAT25_APPLE) {
> @@ -224,16 +226,20 @@ static int __nat25_network_hash(unsigned char *network_addr)
>  	} else if (network_addr[0] == NAT25_PPPOE) {
>  		unsigned long x;
> 
> -		x = network_addr[0] ^ network_addr[1] ^ network_addr[2] ^ network_addr[3] ^ network_addr[4] ^ network_addr[5] ^ network_addr[6] ^ network_addr[7] ^ network_addr[8];
> +		x = network_addr[0] ^ network_addr[1] ^ network_addr[2] ^
> +		    network_addr[3] ^ network_addr[4] ^ network_addr[5] ^

Same here


> +		    network_addr[6] ^ network_addr[7] ^ network_addr[8];
> 
>  		return x & (NAT25_HASH_SIZE - 1);
>  	} else if (network_addr[0] == NAT25_IPV6) {
>  		unsigned long x;
> 
> -		x = network_addr[1] ^ network_addr[2] ^ network_addr[3] ^ network_addr[4] ^ network_addr[5] ^
> -			network_addr[6] ^ network_addr[7] ^ network_addr[8] ^ network_addr[9] ^ network_addr[10] ^
> -			network_addr[11] ^ network_addr[12] ^ network_addr[13] ^ network_addr[14] ^ network_addr[15] ^
> -			network_addr[16];
> +		x = network_addr[1] ^ network_addr[2] ^ network_addr[3] ^
> +		    network_addr[4] ^ network_addr[5] ^ network_addr[6] ^
> +		    network_addr[7] ^ network_addr[8] ^ network_addr[9] ^
> +		    network_addr[10] ^ network_addr[11] ^ network_addr[12] ^
> +		    network_addr[13] ^ network_addr[14] ^ network_addr[15] ^
> +		    network_addr[16];

And here.

thanks,

greg k-h