linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] usb: storage: jumpshot: Use const for constant arrays

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: <a4e81827-b506-491f-8087-204044705c42@rowland.harvard.edu>
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2025 10:11:02 -0500
From: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
To: j.ne@...teo.net
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, usb-storage@...ts.one-eyed-alien.net,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Jonathan Neuschäfer <j.neuschaefer@....net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb: storage: jumpshot: Use const for constant arrays

On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 01:25:03PM +0100, J. Neuschäfer via B4 Relay wrote:
> From: "J. Neuschäfer" <j.ne@...teo.net>
> 
> These arrays are not modified. Make them const.

This does not explain _why_ you want to declare these arrays const.

> Signed-off-by: J. Neuschäfer <j.ne@...teo.net>
> ---
> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Neuschäfer <j.neuschaefer@....net>

There should not be two Signed-off-by lines for the same person.  You 
should keep only the one with the email address you used for sending the 
patch.  And it should have your full name, just like signing a legal 
document.

> ---
> 
> This change was compile-tested with ARCH=powerpc
> ---
>  drivers/usb/storage/jumpshot.c | 10 +++++-----
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/usb/storage/jumpshot.c b/drivers/usb/storage/jumpshot.c
> index 39ca84d6859122903de4e64b13e697e8b7d4ab31..089c6f8ac85fbb683cca8b03a2ff06c0ca776167 100644
> --- a/drivers/usb/storage/jumpshot.c
> +++ b/drivers/usb/storage/jumpshot.c
> @@ -367,16 +367,16 @@ static int jumpshot_handle_mode_sense(struct us_data *us,
>  				      struct scsi_cmnd * srb, 
>  				      int sense_6)
>  {
> -	static unsigned char rw_err_page[12] = {
> +	static const unsigned char rw_err_page[12] = {
>  		0x1, 0xA, 0x21, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0
>  	};
> -	static unsigned char cache_page[12] = {
> +	static const unsigned char cache_page[12] = {
>  		0x8, 0xA, 0x1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0
>  	};
> -	static unsigned char rbac_page[12] = {
> +	static const unsigned char rbac_page[12] = {
>  		0x1B, 0xA, 0, 0x81, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0
>  	};
> -	static unsigned char timer_page[8] = {
> +	static const unsigned char timer_page[8] = {
>  		0x1C, 0x6, 0, 0, 0, 0
>  	};
>  	unsigned char pc, page_code;
> @@ -477,7 +477,7 @@ static int jumpshot_transport(struct scsi_cmnd *srb, struct us_data *us)
>  	int rc;
>  	unsigned long block, blocks;
>  	unsigned char *ptr = us->iobuf;
> -	static unsigned char inquiry_response[8] = {
> +	static const unsigned char inquiry_response[8] = {
>  		0x00, 0x80, 0x00, 0x01, 0x1F, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00
>  	};

There's nothing wrong with this.  However, several other source files in 
this directory also have static arrays that are never written to.  Why 
don't you change all of them?

If you do, it will be best to put the changes for each of the files in 
its own patch, and then submit them as a series of patches.

Alan Stern