netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 4/5] net: phy: broadcom: Add support for WAKE

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAMZ6Rq+HK8Ps2QZsqi1C5Dgjn=EDhT5hWks=T02x5AMqzXkNhw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2023 11:50:25 +0900
From: Vincent MAILHOL <mailhol.vincent@...adoo.fr>
To: Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@...adcom.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Doug Berger <opendmb@...il.com>, 
	Broadcom internal kernel review list <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>, 
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, 
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, 
	Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>, Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>, 
	Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>, Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>, 
	Gal Pressman <gal@...dia.com>, Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>, 
	Daniil Tatianin <d-tatianin@...dex-team.ru>, Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>, 
	Justin Chen <justin.chen@...adcom.com>, Ratheesh Kannoth <rkannoth@...vell.com>, 
	Joe Damato <jdamato@...tly.com>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, 
	open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 4/5] net: phy: broadcom: Add support for WAKE_FILTER

On Fri. 27 Oct. 2023 at 02:55, Florian Fainelli
<florian.fainelli@...adcom.com> wrote:
> Hi Vincent,
>
> On 10/25/23 19:13, Vincent MAILHOL wrote:
> [snip]
> >>
> >> This looks like an endianness conversion (I can not tell if this is
> >> big to little or the opposite)...
> >
> > Oopsy! On second look, this is an open coded cpu to big endian
> > conversion. So the question I should have asked is:
> >
> >    why not use the put_unaligned_be16() helper here?
>
> Because this is consistent with the existing code, though I will keep
> that suggestion in mind as a subsequent patch. I personally find it
> clearer expressed that way, but can update.

Fair enough. I agree that this is not something to be fixed in this series.

For your future consideration, I would have done it as:

        __be16 da[ETH_ALEN / sizeof(__be16)];
        /* ... */
        da[i] = cpu_to_be16(~ret);

da[] can eventually be casted back to u8 * once populated.

(...)