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: Tue, 22 Mar 2022 18:12:08 +0000 From: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM> To: 'Alexander Lobakin' <alexandr.lobakin@...el.com> CC: 'Wan Jiabing' <wanjiabing@...o.com>, Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>, Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, "intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org" <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>, "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: RE: [PATCH v2] ice: use min_t() to make code cleaner in ice_gnss From: Alexander Lobakin > Sent: 22 March 2022 17:51 > From: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM> > Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2022 16:02:20 +0000 > > > From: Wan Jiabing > > > Sent: 21 March 2022 14:00 > > > > > > Fix the following coccicheck warning: > > > ./drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_gnss.c:79:26-27: WARNING opportunity for min() > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Wan Jiabing <wanjiabing@...o.com> > > > --- > > > Changelog: > > > v2: > > > - Use typeof(bytes_left) instead of u8. > > > --- > > > drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_gnss.c | 3 +-- > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_gnss.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_gnss.c > > > index 35579cf4283f..57586a2e6dec 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_gnss.c > > > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_gnss.c > > > @@ -76,8 +76,7 @@ static void ice_gnss_read(struct kthread_work *work) > > > for (i = 0; i < data_len; i += bytes_read) { > > > u16 bytes_left = data_len - i; > > > > Oh FFS why is that u16? > > Don't do arithmetic on anything smaller than 'int' > > Any reasoning? I don't say it's good or bad, just want to hear your > arguments (disasms, perf and object code measurements) etc. Look at the object code on anything except x86. The compiler has to add instruction to mask the value (which is in a full sized register) down to 16 bits after every arithmetic operation. David - Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists