netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] ieee802154: Use kmemdup instead of duplicating it in ca8210_test_int_driver

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: <e2f699bf-a8c6-f1c0-a268-9b18518ae595@datenfreihafen.org>
Date:   Thu, 9 Aug 2018 10:57:16 +0200
From:   Stefan Schmidt <stefan@...enfreihafen.org>
To:     YueHaibing <yuehaibing@...wei.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
        h.morris@...coda.com, alex.aring@...il.com
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-wpan@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] ieee802154: Use kmemdup instead of duplicating
 it in ca8210_test_int_driver_write

Hello Yue.

On 08/09/2018 10:44 AM, YueHaibing wrote:
> On 2018/8/9 16:13, Stefan Schmidt wrote:
>> Hello.
>>
>> On 08/09/2018 08:44 AM, YueHaibing wrote:
>>> Replace calls to kmalloc followed by a memcpy with a direct call to
>>> kmemdup.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: YueHaibing <yuehaibing@...wei.com>
>>
>> Is Yue your forname and Haibing your surname? In that case having it
>> written as
>>
>> Yue Haibing <yuehaibing@...wei.com>
> 
> Well, It should be this, but it's been a long time to use the former

Never to late to fix something I guess. :-)
Not blocking this patch base on this though.

>> in the from line as well as in the SOB would be better.
>>
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/net/ieee802154/ca8210.c | 3 +--
>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ieee802154/ca8210.c b/drivers/net/ieee802154/ca8210.c
>>> index 58299fb..e21279d 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/net/ieee802154/ca8210.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/ieee802154/ca8210.c
>>> @@ -634,10 +634,9 @@ static int ca8210_test_int_driver_write(
>>>  	for (i = 0; i < len; i++)
>>>  		dev_dbg(&priv->spi->dev, "%#03x\n", buf[i]);
>>>  
>>> -	fifo_buffer = kmalloc(len, GFP_KERNEL);
>>> +	fifo_buffer = kmemdup(buf, len, GFP_KERNEL);
>>>  	if (!fifo_buffer)
>>>  		return -ENOMEM;
>>> -	memcpy(fifo_buffer, buf, len);
>>>  	kfifo_in(&test->up_fifo, &fifo_buffer, 4);
>>>  	wake_up_interruptible(&priv->test.readq);
>>
>> Is this some kernel tree wide change you are submitting patches for or
>> only for the ca8210 driver? Is there any specific problem you see with
>> the kmalloc and memcpy code here? To me it looks fine.
>>
>> The reason I ask is to understand if this is bug fix or a cleanup.
> 
> It just a code cleanup only for ca8210.

Thanks for the info. I will wait for Harry's ack and apply it to
wpan-next afterwards.

regards
Stefan Schmidt