netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] net: lantiq_etop: make alignment match open parenthesis

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: <76e32faf-3e50-c71f-afd9-3a2a1da86bd1@wp.pl>
Date:   Sat, 8 Jan 2022 16:48:00 +0100
From:   Aleksander Bajkowski <olek2@...pl>
To:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
        kuba@...nel.org, jgg@...pe.ca, rdunlap@...radead.org,
        arnd@...db.de, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: lantiq_etop: make alignment match open
 parenthesis

Hi Joe,

On 12/30/21 02:32, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Thu, 2021-12-30 at 00:39 +0100, Aleksander Jan Bajkowski wrote:
>> checkpatch.pl complains as the following:
>>
>> Alignment should match open parenthesis
> []
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/lantiq_etop.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/lantiq_etop.c
> []
>> @@ -111,9 +111,9 @@ ltq_etop_alloc_skb(struct ltq_etop_chan *ch)
>>  	ch->skb[ch->dma.desc] = netdev_alloc_skb(ch->netdev, MAX_DMA_DATA_LEN);
>>  	if (!ch->skb[ch->dma.desc])
>>  		return -ENOMEM;
>> -	ch->dma.desc_base[ch->dma.desc].addr = dma_map_single(&priv->pdev->dev,
>> -		ch->skb[ch->dma.desc]->data, MAX_DMA_DATA_LEN,
>> -		DMA_FROM_DEVICE);
>> +	ch->dma.desc_base[ch->dma.desc].addr =
>> +		dma_map_single(&priv->pdev->dev, ch->skb[ch->dma.desc]->data,
>> +			       MAX_DMA_DATA_LEN, DMA_FROM_DEVICE);
>>  	ch->dma.desc_base[ch->dma.desc].addr =
>>  		CPHYSADDR(ch->skb[ch->dma.desc]->data);
> 
> Unassociated trivia:
> 
> ch->dma.desc_base[ch->dma.desc].addr is the target of consecutive assignments.
> 
> That looks very odd.
> 
> Isn't the compiler allowed to toss/throw away the first assignment?
> 
> 


I think you are right. This function should look similar to xrx200_alloc_skb().
Both drivers have the same DMA IP core and packet receiving mechanism.