[PATCH 1/3] staging: keucr: Use memcmp() instead custom StringCmp() and some style cleanups

[PATCH 1/3] staging: keucr: Use memcmp() instead custom StringCmp() and some style cleanups

[Javier Martinez Canillas]

Signed-off-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <martinez.javier@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/staging/keucr/smilsub.c |   59 ++++++++++++++++++++-------------------
 1 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/keucr/smilsub.c b/drivers/staging/keucr/smilsub.c
index ce10cf2..a15cc02 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/keucr/smilsub.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/keucr/smilsub.c
@@ -1482,54 +1482,55 @@ BYTE _Check_D_DevCode(BYTE dcode)
 //----- Check_D_ReadError() ----------------------------------------------
 int Check_D_ReadError(BYTE *redundant)
 {
-    // Driver 不做 ECC Check
-    return(SUCCESS);
-    if (!StringCmp((char *)(redundant+0x0D),(char *)EccBuf,3))
-        if (!StringCmp((char *)(redundant+0x08),(char *)(EccBuf+0x03),3))
-            return(SUCCESS);
+	/* Driver ECC Check */
+	if (memcmp(redundant + 0x0D, EccBuf, 3) ||
+	    memcmp(redundant + 0x08, EccBuf + 0x03, 3))
+		return ERROR;
 
-    return(ERROR);
+	return SUCCESS;
 }
 
 //----- Check_D_Correct() ----------------------------------------------
 int Check_D_Correct(BYTE *buf,BYTE *redundant)
 {
-    // Driver 不做 ECC Check
-    return(SUCCESS);
-    if (StringCmp((char *)(redundant+0x0D),(char *)EccBuf,3))
-        if (_Correct_D_SwECC(buf,redundant+0x0D,EccBuf))
-            return(ERROR);
+	/* Driver ECC Check */
+	if (memcmp(redundant + 0x0D, EccBuf, 3) &&
+	    _Correct_D_SwECC(buf, redundant + 0x0D, EccBuf))
+		return ERROR;
 
-    buf+=0x100;
-    if (StringCmp((char *)(redundant+0x08),(char *)(EccBuf+0x03),3))
-        if (_Correct_D_SwECC(buf,redundant+0x08,EccBuf+0x03))
-            return(ERROR);
+	buf += 0x100;
+	if (memcmp(redundant + 0x08, EccBuf + 0x03, 3) &&
+	    _Correct_D_SwECC(buf, redundant + 0x08, EccBuf + 0x03))
+		return ERROR;
 
-    return(SUCCESS);
+	return SUCCESS;
 }
 
 //----- Check_D_CISdata() ----------------------------------------------
 int Check_D_CISdata(BYTE *buf, BYTE *redundant)
 {
-    BYTE cis[]={0x01,0x03,0xD9,0x01,0xFF,0x18,0x02,0xDF,0x01,0x20};
+	BYTE cis[] = {0x01, 0x03, 0xD9, 0x01, 0xFF, 0x18, 0x02,
+		      0xDF, 0x01, 0x20};
+
+	int cis_len = sizeof(cis);
 
-    if (!IsSSFDCCompliance && !IsXDCompliance)
-        return(SUCCESS);             // 目前為強制 SUCCESS [Arnold 02-08-23] SSFDC 測試, 不能強制 SUCCESS
+	if (!IsSSFDCCompliance && !IsXDCompliance)
+		return SUCCESS;
 
-    if (!StringCmp((char *)(redundant+0x0D),(char *)EccBuf,3))
-        return(StringCmp((char *)buf,(char *)cis,10));
+	if (!memcmp(redundant + 0x0D, EccBuf, 3))
+		return memcmp(buf, cis, cis_len);
 
-    if (!_Correct_D_SwECC(buf,redundant+0x0D,EccBuf))
-        return(StringCmp((char *)buf,(char *)cis,10));
+	if (!_Correct_D_SwECC(buf, redundant + 0x0D, EccBuf))
+		return memcmp(buf, cis, cis_len);
 
-    buf+=0x100;
-    if (!StringCmp((char *)(redundant+0x08),(char *)(EccBuf+0x03),3))
-        return(StringCmp((char *)buf,(char *)cis,10));
+	buf += 0x100;
+	if (!memcmp(redundant + 0x08, EccBuf + 0x03, 3))
+		return memcmp(buf, cis, cis_len);
 
-    if (!_Correct_D_SwECC(buf,redundant+0x08,EccBuf+0x03))
-        return(StringCmp((char *)buf,(char *)cis,10));
+	if (!_Correct_D_SwECC(buf, redundant + 0x08, EccBuf + 0x03))
+		return memcmp(buf, cis, cis_len);
 
-    return(ERROR);
+	return ERROR;
 }
 
 //----- Set_D_RightECC() ----------------------------------------------
-- 
1.7.0.4

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH 1/3] staging: keucr: Use memcmp() instead custom

[Joe Perches]

On Sun, 2011-01-02 at 22:01 +0100, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <martinez.javier@gmail.com>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/keucr/smilsub.c b/drivers/staging/keucr/smilsub.c
> @@ -1482,54 +1482,55 @@ BYTE _Check_D_DevCode(BYTE dcode)
>  //----- Check_D_ReadError() ----------------------------------------------
>  int Check_D_ReadError(BYTE *redundant)
>  {
> -    // Driver 䣰 ECC Check
> -    return(SUCCESS);
> -    if (!StringCmp((char *)(redundant+0x0D),(char *)EccBuf,3))
> -        if (!StringCmp((char *)(redundant+0x08),(char *)(EccBuf+0x03),3))
> -            return(SUCCESS);
> +	/* Driver ECC Check */
> +	if (memcmp(redundant + 0x0D, EccBuf, 3) ||
> +	    memcmp(redundant + 0x08, EccBuf + 0x03, 3))
> +		return ERROR;
>  
> -    return(ERROR);
> +	return SUCCESS;
>  }

This code isn't the same.

Before, the return was always SUCCESS and the code
after the first return was ignored.

You deleted that return and now you do the driver ECC check.
Is that correct?
 
>  //----- Check_D_Correct() ----------------------------------------------
>  int Check_D_Correct(BYTE *buf,BYTE *redundant)
>  {
> -    // Driver 䣰 ECC Check
> -    return(SUCCESS);
> -    if (StringCmp((char *)(redundant+0x0D),(char *)EccBuf,3))
> -        if (_Correct_D_SwECC(buf,redundant+0x0D,EccBuf))
> -            return(ERROR);
> +	/* Driver ECC Check */
> +	if (memcmp(redundant + 0x0D, EccBuf, 3) &&
> +	    _Correct_D_SwECC(buf, redundant + 0x0D, EccBuf))
> +		return ERROR

Here too.

Re: [PATCH 1/3] staging: keucr: Use memcmp() instead custom

[Javier Martinez Canillas]

>>  int Check_D_ReadError(BYTE *redundant)
>>  {
>> -    // Driver 䣰 ECC Check
>> -    return(SUCCESS);
>> -    if (!StringCmp((char *)(redundant+0x0D),(char *)EccBuf,3))
>> -        if (!StringCmp((char *)(redundant+0x08),(char *)(EccBuf+0x03),3))
>> -            return(SUCCESS);
>> +     /* Driver ECC Check */
>> +     if (memcmp(redundant + 0x0D, EccBuf, 3) ||
>> +         memcmp(redundant + 0x08, EccBuf + 0x03, 3))
>> +             return ERROR;
>>
>> -    return(ERROR);
>> +     return SUCCESS;
>>  }
>
> This code isn't the same.
>
> Before, the return was always SUCCESS and the code
> after the first return was ignored.
>
> You deleted that return and now you do the driver ECC check.
> Is that correct?
>

You are right Joe, sorry for that. Should I remove the dead code after
the return SUCCESS or keep it?

-- 
Best regards,

-----------------------------------------
Javier Martínez Canillas
(+34) 682 39 81 69

Re: [PATCH 1/3] staging: keucr: Use memcmp() instead custom

[Joe Perches]

On Sun, 2011-01-02 at 22:21 +0100, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> > This code isn't the same.
> > You deleted that return and now you do the driver ECC check.
> > Is that correct?
> You are right Joe, sorry for that. Should I remove the dead code after
> the return SUCCESS or keep it?

As I said before, I think you should delete it.

On Fri, 2010-12-31 at 12:26 -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> You might as well take out useless code after returns
> instead of just changing function names.
> If you keep it you should reformat it.

Doesn't matter much though.

cheers, Joe