netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/8] net: qualcomm: rmnet: fix struct rmnet_map

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]

Message-ID: <20190521030712.GY2085@tuxbook-pro>
Date:   Mon, 20 May 2019 20:07:12 -0700
From:   Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
To:     Alex Elder <elder@...aro.org>
Cc:     Subash Abhinov Kasiviswanathan <subashab@...eaurora.org>,
        arnd@...db.de, david.brown@...aro.org, agross@...nel.org,
        davem@...emloft.net, ilias.apalodimas@...aro.org,
        cpratapa@...eaurora.org, syadagir@...eaurora.org,
        evgreen@...omium.org, benchan@...gle.com, ejcaruso@...gle.com,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] net: qualcomm: rmnet: fix struct rmnet_map_header

On Mon 20 May 19:30 PDT 2019, Alex Elder wrote:

> On 5/20/19 8:32 PM, Subash Abhinov Kasiviswanathan wrote:
> >>
> >> If you are telling me that the command/data flag resides at bit
> >> 7 of the first byte, I will update the field masks in a later
> >> patch in this series to reflect that.
> >>
> > 
> > Higher order bit is Command / Data.
> 
> So what this means is that to get the command/data bit we use:
> 
> 	first_byte & 0x80
> 
> If that is correct I will remove this patch from the series and
> will update the subsequent patches so bit 7 is the command bit,
> bit 6 is reserved, and bits 0-5 are the pad length.
> 
> I will post a v2 of the series with these changes, and will
> incorporate Bjorn's "Reviewed-by".
> 

But didn't you say that your testing show that the current bit order is
wrong?

I still like the cleanup, if nothing else just to clarify and clearly
document the actual content of this header.

Regards,
Bjorn