linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 wireless-next 2/9] carl9170: remove unnecessary (void*) conversions

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: <e544d992-cddd-4ade-81ef-2eed4f3681e8@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 20 Sep 2023 21:00:08 +0200
From:   Christian Lamparter <chunkeey@...il.com>
To:     Wu Yunchuan <yunchuan@...china.com>, kvalo@...nel.org
Cc:     linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 wireless-next 2/9] carl9170: remove unnecessary (void*)
 conversions

On 9/19/23 06:49, Wu Yunchuan wrote:
> No need cast (void *) to (struct ar9170 *), (u8 *) or (void*).

hmm, your mail went into the spam folder. Good thing I checked.

 From what I remember: The reason why these casts were added in
carl9170 was because of compiler warnings/complaints.
Current gcc compilers should be OK (given that the kernel-bot
didn't react, or went your Mail to their spam-folder as well?)
but have you checked these older versions?

(In 6.5.0 Documentation/admin-guide/README.rst states that one
should have at least gcc 5.1 - could you run with those and
see if C=2 W=1 passes?)

Regards,
Christian

> Signed-off-by: Wu Yunchuan <yunchuan@...china.com>
> ---
>   drivers/net/wireless/ath/carl9170/usb.c | 10 +++++-----
>   1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/carl9170/usb.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/carl9170/usb.c
> index e4eb666c6eea..c4edf8355941 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/carl9170/usb.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/carl9170/usb.c
> @@ -178,7 +178,7 @@ static void carl9170_usb_tx_data_complete(struct urb *urb)
>   	switch (urb->status) {
>   	/* everything is fine */
>   	case 0:
> -		carl9170_tx_callback(ar, (void *)urb->context);
> +		carl9170_tx_callback(ar, urb->context);
>   		break;
>   
>   	/* disconnect */
> @@ -369,7 +369,7 @@ void carl9170_usb_handle_tx_err(struct ar9170 *ar)
>   	struct urb *urb;
>   
>   	while ((urb = usb_get_from_anchor(&ar->tx_err))) {
> -		struct sk_buff *skb = (void *)urb->context;
> +		struct sk_buff *skb = urb->context;
>   
>   		carl9170_tx_drop(ar, skb);
>   		carl9170_tx_callback(ar, skb);
> @@ -397,7 +397,7 @@ static void carl9170_usb_tasklet(struct tasklet_struct *t)
>   
>   static void carl9170_usb_rx_complete(struct urb *urb)
>   {
> -	struct ar9170 *ar = (struct ar9170 *)urb->context;
> +	struct ar9170 *ar = urb->context;
>   	int err;
>   
>   	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!ar))
> @@ -559,7 +559,7 @@ static int carl9170_usb_flush(struct ar9170 *ar)
>   	int ret, err = 0;
>   
>   	while ((urb = usb_get_from_anchor(&ar->tx_wait))) {
> -		struct sk_buff *skb = (void *)urb->context;
> +		struct sk_buff *skb = urb->context;
>   		carl9170_tx_drop(ar, skb);
>   		carl9170_tx_callback(ar, skb);
>   		usb_free_urb(urb);
> @@ -668,7 +668,7 @@ int carl9170_exec_cmd(struct ar9170 *ar, const enum carl9170_cmd_oids cmd,
>   		memcpy(ar->cmd.data, payload, plen);
>   
>   	spin_lock_bh(&ar->cmd_lock);
> -	ar->readbuf = (u8 *)out;
> +	ar->readbuf = out;
>   	ar->readlen = outlen;
>   	spin_unlock_bh(&ar->cmd_lock);
>