netdev - Re: [PATCH] net/nfc/nic: refined function nci_hci_resp

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20201114165439.7e87c72b@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Date:   Sat, 14 Nov 2020 16:54:39 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Alex Shi <alex.shi@...ux.alibaba.com>
Cc:     linux-nfc@...ts.01.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/nfc/nic: refined function nci_hci_resp_received

You had a typo in the subject nic -> nci. But really nfc: would be
enough.

On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 11:51:57 +0800 Alex Shi wrote:
> We don't use the parameter result actually, so better to remove it and
> skip a gcc warning for unused variable.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Alex Shi <alex.shi@...ux.alibaba.com>

Let's CC the nfc list.

nfc folks any reason the list is not mentioned under NFC SUBSYSTEM?

> diff --git a/net/nfc/nci/hci.c b/net/nfc/nci/hci.c
> index c18e76d6d8ba..6b275a387a92 100644
> --- a/net/nfc/nci/hci.c
> +++ b/net/nfc/nci/hci.c
> @@ -363,16 +363,13 @@ static void nci_hci_cmd_received(struct nci_dev *ndev, u8 pipe,
>  }
>  
>  static void nci_hci_resp_received(struct nci_dev *ndev, u8 pipe,
> -				  u8 result, struct sk_buff *skb)
> +				  struct sk_buff *skb)
>  {
>  	struct nci_conn_info    *conn_info;
> -	u8 status = result;
>  
>  	conn_info = ndev->hci_dev->conn_info;
> -	if (!conn_info) {
> -		status = NCI_STATUS_REJECTED;
> +	if (!conn_info)
>  		goto exit;
> -	}
>  
>  	conn_info->rx_skb = skb;
>  

LGTM based on the fact that commit d8cd37ed2fc8 ("NFC: nci: Fix improper
management of HCI return code") started seemingly intentionally ignoring 
the status.

Applied, thanks!