From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-GM-THRID: 6202030500933009408 X-Received: by 10.66.147.165 with SMTP id tl5mr2756539pab.21.1444043186228; Mon, 05 Oct 2015 04:06:26 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: outreachy-kernel@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.182.16.165 with SMTP id h5ls1264949obd.93.gmail; Mon, 05 Oct 2015 04:06:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.182.191.34 with SMTP id gv2mr3333690obc.40.1444043185934; Mon, 05 Oct 2015 04:06:25 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org (mail.linuxfoundation.org. [140.211.169.12]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id j22si2360078ywg.2.2015.10.05.04.06.25 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 05 Oct 2015 04:06:25 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of gregkh@linuxfoundation.org designates 140.211.169.12 as permitted sender) client-ip=140.211.169.12; Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of gregkh@linuxfoundation.org designates 140.211.169.12 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org Received: from localhost (unknown [166.170.36.102]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D1B9720C3; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 11:06:21 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2015 12:06:14 +0100 From: Greg KH To: Julia Lawall Cc: Shraddha Barke , outreachy-kernel@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [Outreachy kernel] [PATCH v3 1/2] Staging: wilc1000: wilc_wfi_cfgoperations: Replace memset with eth_zero_addr Message-ID: <20151005110614.GA23775@kroah.com> References: <1444026634-14551-1-git-send-email-shraddha.6596@gmail.com> <1444026634-14551-2-git-send-email-shraddha.6596@gmail.com> <20151005095302.GA5600@kroah.com> <20151005104438.GA7040@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 11:49:24AM +0100, Julia Lawall wrote: > On Mon, 5 Oct 2015, Greg KH wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 11:28:27AM +0100, Julia Lawall wrote: > > > On Mon, 5 Oct 2015, Greg KH wrote: > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 12:00:33PM +0530, Shraddha Barke wrote: > > > > > Use eth_zero_addr to assign the zero address to the given address > > > > > array instead of memset when second argument is address of zero. > > > > > > > > How do you know that this is safe to do? You need to document the heck > > > > out of this and why you know this is ok. See other patches that do this > > > > for examples of what you need to do. > > > > > > This one is just a memset, so I guess there are no constraints on is use? > > > > I do not know, I thought the constraints were there for all eth_* > > function calls. > > The definition is just: > > 244 static inline void eth_zero_addr(u8 *addr) > 245 { > 246 memset(addr, 0x00, ETH_ALEN); > 247 } Ah, didn't know that, nevermind then. Shraddha, can you please resend this series? thanks, greg k-h