Re: [PATCH v3] staging: rtl8712: Use ether_addr_copy() instead of memcpy()

[Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net>]

On 05/20/2015 01:41 PM, Jagan Teki wrote:
> On 18 May 2015 at 22:02, Jagan Teki <jteki@openedev.com> wrote:
>> Fixes Warning encounter this by applying checkpatch.pl against this file:
>> Prefer ether_addr_copy() over memcpy() if the Ethernet addresses
>> are __aligned(2)
>>
>> pahole output for respective structures:
>> - addr->sa_data
>> struct sockaddr {
>>          sa_family_t                sa_family;            /*     0     2 */
>>          char                       sa_data[14];          /*     2    14 */
>>
>>          /* size: 16, cachelines: 1, members: 2 */
>>          /* last cacheline: 16 bytes */
>> };
>>
>> - pnetdev->dev_addr
>> dev_addr is interface address infor from generic net_device structure
>> which is properly aligned and have some patches with this change as well.
>> "staging: rtl8712: fix Prefer ether_addr_copy() over memcpy()"
>> (sha1: 36e4d8826b317080e283e4edd08bf8d5ac706f38)
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jagan Teki <jteki@openedev.com>
>> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
>> Cc: Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net>
>> Cc: Florian Schilhabel <florian.c.schilhabel@googlemail.com>
>> ---
>> Changes for v3:
>>          - Removed unaligned conversions
>> Changes for v2:
>>          - Describe a changelog, to prove address are aligned
>>
>>   drivers/staging/rtl8712/os_intfs.c | 2 +-
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8712/os_intfs.c b/drivers/staging/rtl8712/os_intfs.c
>> index 6e776e5..d5f4c4d 100644
>> --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8712/os_intfs.c
>> +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8712/os_intfs.c
>> @@ -181,7 +181,7 @@ static int r871x_net_set_mac_address(struct net_device *pnetdev, void *p)
>>          struct sockaddr *addr = p;
>>
>>          if (padapter->bup == false)
>> -               memcpy(pnetdev->dev_addr, addr->sa_data, ETH_ALEN);
>> +               ether_addr_copy(pnetdev->dev_addr, addr->sa_data);
>>          return 0;
>>   }
>>
>> --
>
> Ping!

Ah. Not only are you ignorant, but you are also rude! The patch was not NACKed, 
thus it will be picked up in good time.

Larry