linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 9/9] tty: n_gsm: cleanup gsm_control_command and gsm_control

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: <345feade-76b0-b8e4-60fc-6ce03df3ebe1@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 5 Apr 2023 12:15:22 +0300 (EEST)
From:   Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>
To:     "D. Starke" <daniel.starke@...mens.com>
cc:     linux-serial <linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/9] tty: n_gsm: cleanup gsm_control_command and
 gsm_control_reply

On Wed, 5 Apr 2023, D. Starke wrote:

> From: Daniel Starke <daniel.starke@...mens.com>
> 
> There are multiple places in gsm_control_command and gsm_control_reply that
> derive the specific DLCI handle directly out of the DLCI table in gsm.
> 
> Add a local variable which holds this handle and use it instead to improve
> code readability.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Starke <daniel.starke@...mens.com>
> ---
>  drivers/tty/n_gsm.c | 14 ++++++++------
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/tty/n_gsm.c b/drivers/tty/n_gsm.c
> index 61f9825fde3c..87720ebc38d7 100644
> --- a/drivers/tty/n_gsm.c
> +++ b/drivers/tty/n_gsm.c
> @@ -1454,16 +1454,17 @@ static int gsm_control_command(struct gsm_mux *gsm, int cmd, const u8 *data,
>  			       int dlen)
>  {
>  	struct gsm_msg *msg;
> +	struct gsm_dlci *dlci = gsm->dlci[0];
>  
> -	msg = gsm_data_alloc(gsm, 0, dlen + 2, gsm->dlci[0]->ftype);
> +	msg = gsm_data_alloc(gsm, 0, dlen + 2, dlci->ftype);
>  	if (msg == NULL)
>  		return -ENOMEM;
>  
>  	msg->data[0] = (cmd << 1) | CR | EA;	/* Set C/R */
>  	msg->data[1] = (dlen << 1) | EA;
>  	memcpy(msg->data + 2, data, dlen);
> -	gsm_data_queue(gsm->dlci[0], msg);
> -	gsm->dlci[0]->tx += dlen;
> +	gsm_data_queue(dlci, msg);
> +	dlci->tx += dlen;
>  
>  	return 0;
>  }
> @@ -1482,15 +1483,16 @@ static void gsm_control_reply(struct gsm_mux *gsm, int cmd, const u8 *data,
>  					int dlen)
>  {
>  	struct gsm_msg *msg;
> +	struct gsm_dlci *dlci = gsm->dlci[0];
>  
> -	msg = gsm_data_alloc(gsm, 0, dlen + 2, gsm->dlci[0]->ftype);
> +	msg = gsm_data_alloc(gsm, 0, dlen + 2, dlci->ftype);
>  	if (msg == NULL)
>  		return;
>  	msg->data[0] = (cmd & 0xFE) << 1 | EA;	/* Clear C/R */
>  	msg->data[1] = (dlen << 1) | EA;
>  	memcpy(msg->data + 2, data, dlen);
> -	gsm_data_queue(gsm->dlci[0], msg);
> -	gsm->dlci[0]->tx += dlen;
> +	gsm_data_queue(dlci, msg);
> +	dlci->tx += dlen;
>  }
>  
>  /**
> 

IMO, this patch should be done before patch 8/9.

-- 
 i.