From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@csr.com>
Cc: torvalds@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] UWB, WUSB, and WLP subsystems for 2.6.28
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2008 13:02:51 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20081014130251.aa008a5e.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <48EF45BC.1020805@csr.com>
> On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 13:08:28 +0100 David Vrabel <david.vrabel@csr.com> wrote:
> Please pull the new UWB, WUSB and WLP subsystems from
>
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/dvrabel/uwb.git for-upstream
didn't happen?
What is the review status of this work? I don't remember seeing it on any
of the lists where I lurk - perhaps a full resend will help things along.
<quick scan>
Code looks reasonable.
It has lots of comments which start with /**, which is the
this-is-kerneldoc token. Only they're not kerneldoc comments. These
should all be converted to kerneldoc, or replace the /** with /*.
uwb_beca_purge() should use time_after() or time_before().
In uwb_bce_print_IEs(), the cast of
uwb_rc_evt_beacon_WUSB_0100.BeaconInfo[] into a struct uwb_rc_evt_beacon*
looks really worrisome from an alignment POV. Can it result in misaligned
accesses on architectures which don't like that? (ia64, alpha, ...)
Code does kzalloc(a * b, ..) in some places. kcalloc() is preferred, so
readers don't have to worry whether the code is vulnerable to
multiplicative overflows.
The code has a random mixture of
zero-lines-between-end-of-locals-and-start-of-code and
one-line-between-end-of-locals-and-start-of-code (and two line). The
latter is usually preferred.
The person who misnamed DEFINE_BITMAP as DECLARE_BITMAP instead gets a
wedgie.
It seems strange that uwb_drp_ie_update(UWB_RSV_STATE_NONE) will free
rsv->drp_ie then reallocate it.
printk_ratelimit() is a bit silly because it shares state with other
unrelated subsystems which might be using it. Direct use of __ratelimit()
would be better.
All minor stuff - I didn't spend long looking...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-10-14 20:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-10-10 12:08 [GIT PULL] UWB, WUSB, and WLP subsystems for 2.6.28 David Vrabel
2008-10-14 20:02 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2008-10-15 12:50 ` David Vrabel
2008-10-16 13:20 ` David Vrabel
2008-10-21 16:44 ` Marcel Holtmann
2008-10-17 16:50 ` Marcel Holtmann
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2008-10-22 14:20 David Vrabel
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20081014130251.aa008a5e.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=david.vrabel@csr.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox