netdev - Re: [PATCH] realtek: Add switch variable to 'switch case not processed' messages

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: <1474738358.23838.11.camel@perches.com>
Date:   Sat, 24 Sep 2016 10:32:38 -0700
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net>,
        Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.de>,
        Jes Sorensen <Jes.Sorensen@...hat.com>
Cc:     Chaoming Li <chaoming_li@...lsil.com.cn>,
        Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>,
        linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] realtek: Add switch variable to 'switch case not
 processed' messages

(adding Jes Sorensen to recipients)

On Sat, 2016-09-24 at 11:35 -0500, Larry Finger wrote:
> I have patches that makes HAL_DEF_WOWLAN be a no-op for the rest of the drivers, 
> and one that sets the enum values for that particular statement to hex values. I 
> also looked at the other large enums and decided that they never need the human 
> lookup.

Hey Larry.

There are many somewhat common realtek wireless drivers.

Not to step on your toes, but what do you think of
rationalizing the switch/case statements of all the
realtek drivers in a few steps:

o Reindent all the switch/case blocks to a more normal
  kernel style (git diff -w would show no changes here)

o cast, spacing and parenthesis reductions
  Lots of odd and somewhat unique styles in various
  drivers, looks like too many individual authors without
  a style guide / code enforcer using slightly different
  personalized code.  Glancing at the code, it looks to be
  similar logic, just written in different styles.

o Logic changes like
  from:
    if (foo) func(..., bar, ...); else func(..., baz, ...);
  to:
    func(..., foo ? bar : baz, ...);
  to make the case statement code blocks more consistent
  and emit somewhat smaller object code.

o Consolidation of equivalent function spanning drivers
  With the style only changes minimized, where possible
  make the drivers use common ops/callback functions.

Is there any value in that or is Jes' work going to make
doing any or all of this unnecessary and futile?