netdev - [PATCH net-next v2 12/17] ethernet: ucc_geth: use UCC_GETH_{RX,TX}_BD_RING

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: <20210119150802.19997-13-rasmus.villemoes@prevas.dk>
Date:   Tue, 19 Jan 2021 16:07:57 +0100
From:   Rasmus Villemoes <rasmus.villemoes@...vas.dk>
To:     netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Li Yang <leoyang.li@....com>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Zhao Qiang <qiang.zhao@....com>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Joakim Tjernlund <Joakim.Tjernlund@...inera.com>,
        Rasmus Villemoes <rasmus.villemoes@...vas.dk>
Subject: [PATCH net-next v2 12/17] ethernet: ucc_geth: use UCC_GETH_{RX,TX}_BD_RING_ALIGNMENT macros directly

These macros both have the value 32, there's no point first
initializing align to a lower value.

If anything, one could throw in a
BUILD_BUG_ON(UCC_GETH_TX_BD_RING_ALIGNMENT < 4), but it's not worth it
- lots of code depends on named constants having sensible values.

Signed-off-by: Rasmus Villemoes <rasmus.villemoes@...vas.dk>
---
 drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/ucc_geth.c | 10 ++++------
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/ucc_geth.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/ucc_geth.c
index 67b93d60243e..2369a5ede680 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/ucc_geth.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/ucc_geth.c
@@ -2196,9 +2196,8 @@ static int ucc_geth_alloc_tx(struct ucc_geth_private *ugeth)
 		    UCC_GETH_TX_BD_RING_SIZE_MEMORY_ALIGNMENT)
 			length += UCC_GETH_TX_BD_RING_SIZE_MEMORY_ALIGNMENT;
 		if (uf_info->bd_mem_part == MEM_PART_SYSTEM) {
-			u32 align = 4;
-			if (UCC_GETH_TX_BD_RING_ALIGNMENT > 4)
-				align = UCC_GETH_TX_BD_RING_ALIGNMENT;
+			u32 align = UCC_GETH_TX_BD_RING_ALIGNMENT;
+
 			ugeth->tx_bd_ring_offset[j] =
 				(u32) kmalloc((u32) (length + align), GFP_KERNEL);
 
@@ -2274,9 +2273,8 @@ static int ucc_geth_alloc_rx(struct ucc_geth_private *ugeth)
 	for (j = 0; j < ug_info->numQueuesRx; j++) {
 		length = ug_info->bdRingLenRx[j] * sizeof(struct qe_bd);
 		if (uf_info->bd_mem_part == MEM_PART_SYSTEM) {
-			u32 align = 4;
-			if (UCC_GETH_RX_BD_RING_ALIGNMENT > 4)
-				align = UCC_GETH_RX_BD_RING_ALIGNMENT;
+			u32 align = UCC_GETH_RX_BD_RING_ALIGNMENT;
+
 			ugeth->rx_bd_ring_offset[j] =
 				(u32) kmalloc((u32) (length + align), GFP_KERNEL);
 			if (ugeth->rx_bd_ring_offset[j] != 0)
-- 
2.23.0