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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2018 17:50:58 -0700 (PDT) From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> To: natechancellor@...il.com Cc: isdn@...ux-pingi.de, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] isdn: hfc_{pci,sx}: Avoid empty body if statements From: Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@...il.com> Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2018 17:42:51 -0700 > On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 05:23:10PM -0700, David Miller wrote: >> From: Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@...il.com> >> Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2018 17:21:17 -0700 >> >> > Thanks for the review, I went ahead and compiled with the following diff >> > on top of v2 and got no warnings from Clang, GCC, or sparse, does this >> > seem satisfactory for v3? >> >> Well, one thing I notice. >> > >> > @@ -86,7 +86,7 @@ release_io_hfcpci(struct IsdnCardState *cs) >> > pci_free_consistent(cs->hw.hfcpci.dev, 0x8000, >> > cs->hw.hfcpci.fifos, cs->hw.hfcpci.dma); >> > cs->hw.hfcpci.fifos = NULL; >> > - iounmap((void *)cs->hw.hfcpci.pci_io); >> > + iounmap(cs->hw.hfcpci.pci_io); >> > } >> >> Driver uses iounmap(). >> >> > @@ -1692,7 +1692,7 @@ setup_hfcpci(struct IsdnCard *card) >> > printk(KERN_WARNING "HFC-PCI: No IRQ for PCI card found\n"); >> > return (0); >> > } >> > - cs->hw.hfcpci.pci_io = (char *)(unsigned long)dev_hfcpci->resource[1].start; >> > + cs->hw.hfcpci.pci_io = (void __iomem *)(unsigned long)dev_hfcpci->resource[1].start; >> > printk(KERN_INFO "HiSax: HFC-PCI card manufacturer: %s card name: %s\n", id_list[i].vendor_name, id_list[i].card_name); >> >> But does not use iomap(). You won't need any cast here if it did use >> iomap() properly. >> >> Thanks. > > So this? That's definitely a lot better, yes! I wonder what exactly it is checking there though. I guess it wants to see if the resource->start value is zero and bail with an error it so. Anyways, this code has been like this for ages and what you are proposing is definitely a significant improvement. Thanks.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists