netdev - Re: [PATCH] e1000, e1000e valid-addr fixes

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <472A2989.2060603@garzik.org>
Date:	Thu, 01 Nov 2007 15:31:21 -0400
From:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To:	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>
CC:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	davej@...hat.com, auke-jan.h.kok@...el.com, ajax@...hat.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] e1000, e1000e valid-addr fixes

Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> How about:
> 
> static int eth_validate_addr(const struct net_device *dev)
> {
> 	return is_valid_ether_addr(dev->dev_addr) ? 0 : -EINVAL;
> }

hmmm -- its a slow path, so I don't see the value of marking the 
argument 'const' -- right now this implementation merely reads the 
dev->dev_addr[], but that need not always be the case.

And I don't see the value of squashing everything onto one line, IMO the 
current version is more readable.

	Jeff



-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html