netdev - Re: [PATCH] net/usb: kalmia: Various fixes for better support of non-x86 architectures.

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

Date:	Thu, 23 Jun 2011 18:55:12 +0400
From:	Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@...sta.com>
To:	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
CC:	Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@...sta.com>,
	"Marius B. Kotsbak" <marius.kotsbak@...il.com>,
	davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, "Marius B. Kotsbak" <marius@...sbak.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/usb: kalmia: Various fixes for better support of
 non-x86 architectures.

Alan Stern wrote:

>>> -Support for big endian.
>>> -Do not use USB buffers at the stack.
>>> -Safer/more efficient code for local constants.

>>> Signed-off-by: Marius B. Kotsbak<marius@...sbak.com>

>>> ---
>>>   drivers/net/usb/kalmia.c |   40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
>>>   1 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)

>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/usb/kalmia.c b/drivers/net/usb/kalmia.c
>>> index d965fb1..d4edeb2 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/net/usb/kalmia.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/usb/kalmia.c
>>> @@ -100,27 +100,35 @@ kalmia_send_init_packet(struct usbnet *dev, u8 *init_msg, u8 init_msg_len,
>>>   static int
>>>   kalmia_init_and_get_ethernet_addr(struct usbnet *dev, u8 *ethernet_addr)
>>>   {
>>> -	char init_msg_1[] =
>>> +	const static char init_msg_1[] =
>>>   		{ 0x57, 0x50, 0x04, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x20, 0x00, 0x00,
>>>   		0x00, 0x00 };
>>> -	char init_msg_2[] =
>>> +	const static char init_msg_2[] =
>>>   		{ 0x57, 0x50, 0x04, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x02, 0x00, 0xf4,
>>>   		0x00, 0x00 };

>>     Actually 'const' alone should've been enough for the variable to be placed 
>> in the data section ISO stack.

> I don't understand what "ISO stack" means here.

    ISO == instead of.

> I would think that "const" might or might not cause the array to be 
> allocated statically.

    At least with gcc, it will be allocated statically.

> Alan Stern

WBR, Sergei
--
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