netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] net: liquidio: lio_core: Remove unnecessary (void*) conversions

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]

Date: Mon, 15 May 2023 12:28:19 +0300
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>
To: wuych <yunchuan@...china.com>
Cc: dchickles@...vell.com, sburla@...vell.com, fmanlunas@...vell.com,
	davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org,
	pabeni@...hat.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: liquidio: lio_core: Remove unnecessary
 (void*) conversions

On Mon, May 15, 2023 at 04:49:06PM +0800, wuych wrote:
> Pointer variables of void * type do not require type cast.
> 
> Signed-off-by: wuych <yunchuan@...china.com>
> ---
>  drivers/net/ethernet/cavium/liquidio/lio_core.c | 6 ++----
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/cavium/liquidio/lio_core.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/cavium/liquidio/lio_core.c
> index 882b2be06ea0..10d9dab26c92 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/cavium/liquidio/lio_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/cavium/liquidio/lio_core.c
> @@ -904,8 +904,7 @@ static
>  int liquidio_schedule_msix_droq_pkt_handler(struct octeon_droq *droq, u64 ret)
>  {
>  	struct octeon_device *oct = droq->oct_dev;
> -	struct octeon_device_priv *oct_priv =
> -	    (struct octeon_device_priv *)oct->priv;
> +	struct octeon_device_priv *oct_priv = oct->priv;
>  

Networking code needs to be in Reverse Christmas Tree order.  Longest
lines first.  This code wasn't really in Reverse Christmas Tree order
to begine with but now it's more obvious.

regards,
dan carpenter