linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] e1000: drop checksum constant cast to u16 in comparisons

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: <41ea8706-ffb2-48c6-8a2f-5c4c51dc1a0e@jacekk.info>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2025 15:03:24 +0200
From: Jacek Kowalski <jacek@...ekk.info>
To: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
Cc: Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>,
 Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>,
 Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>, "David S. Miller"
 <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
 Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
 intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] e1000: drop checksum constant cast to u16 in
 comparisons

Hey,

> 1. It's normal for patch-sets, to have a cover letter.
>    That provides a handy place for high level comments,
>    perhaps ironically, such as this one.

I'll add it in a second iteration.

> 2. Please provide some text in the patch description.
>    I know these changes are trivial. But we'd like to have something there.
>    E.g.
> 
>    Remove unnecessary cast of constants to u16,
>    allowing the C type system to do it's thing.
> 
>    No behavioural change intended.
>    Compile tested only.

Wilco.

> 4. Please make sure the patchset applies cleanly to it's target tree.
>    It seems that in it's current form the patchset doesn't
>    apply to iwl-next or net-next.

Just to be sure, iwl-next is this one:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tnguy/linux.git
refs/heads/for-next
?

> 5. It's up to you. But in general there is no need
>    to CC linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org on Networking patches

I've just followed get_maintainers.pl output to the letter.

> As for this patch itself, it looks good to me.
> But I think you missed two.

Rather: I have not touched subtraction on purpose.

But checking the compiler output - yes, it can be dropped as well.

I'll prepare an updated patch set with subtraction changes across Intel drivers included.

-- 
Best regards,
  Jacek Kowalski