From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
To: "Fabio M. De Francesco" <fmdefrancesco@gmail.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net>,
linux-staging@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: r8188eu: Fix different base types in assignments and parameters
Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2021 17:05:05 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210802140505.GZ1931@kadam> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210730181452.23062-1-fmdefrancesco@gmail.com>
On Fri, Jul 30, 2021 at 08:14:52PM +0200, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> Fix sparse warnings of different base types in assignments
> and in passing function parameters.
This patch fixes some endian bugs but it's not mentioned at all in the
commit message. Did you send to the correct patch?
>
> Signed-off-by: Fabio M. De Francesco <fmdefrancesco@gmail.com>
> ---
> drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_br_ext.c | 46 ++++++++++++++++++-----
> 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_br_ext.c b/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_br_ext.c
> index e00302137a60..31ca2e548555 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_br_ext.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_br_ext.c
> @@ -71,7 +71,7 @@ static inline int __nat25_add_pppoe_tag(struct sk_buff *skb, struct pppoe_tag *t
> struct pppoe_hdr *ph = (struct pppoe_hdr *)(skb->data + ETH_HLEN);
> int data_len;
>
> - data_len = tag->tag_len + TAG_HDR_LEN;
> + data_len = be16_to_cpu(tag->tag_len) + TAG_HDR_LEN;
> if (skb_tailroom(skb) < data_len) {
> _DEBUG_ERR("skb_tailroom() failed in add SID tag!\n");
> return -1;
> @@ -134,42 +134,68 @@ static inline void __nat25_generate_ipv4_network_addr(unsigned char *networkAddr
> }
>
> static inline void __nat25_generate_ipx_network_addr_with_node(unsigned char *networkAddr,
> - unsigned int *ipxNetAddr, unsigned char *ipxNodeAddr)
> + __be32 *ipxNetAddr, unsigned char *ipxNodeAddr)
> {
> + union {
> + unsigned int f0;
> + unsigned char f1[IPX_NODE_LEN];
What is going on here?? Why is f1 six bytes?
> + } addr;
> +
> memset(networkAddr, 0, MAX_NETWORK_ADDR_LEN);
>
> networkAddr[0] = NAT25_IPX;
> - memcpy(networkAddr+1, (unsigned char *)ipxNetAddr, 4);
> + addr.f0 = be32_to_cpu(*ipxNetAddr);
> + memcpy(networkAddr+1, addr.f1, 4);
What's the point of a union? memcpy() doesn't care about endian
anotations.
> memcpy(networkAddr+5, ipxNodeAddr, 6);
> }
>
> static inline void __nat25_generate_ipx_network_addr_with_socket(unsigned char *networkAddr,
> - unsigned int *ipxNetAddr, unsigned short *ipxSocketAddr)
> + __be32 *ipxNetAddr, __be16 *ipxSocketAddr)
> {
> + union {
> + unsigned int f0;
> + unsigned char f1[4];
> + } addr;
> +
> memset(networkAddr, 0, MAX_NETWORK_ADDR_LEN);
>
> networkAddr[0] = NAT25_IPX;
> - memcpy(networkAddr+1, (unsigned char *)ipxNetAddr, 4);
> - memcpy(networkAddr+5, (unsigned char *)ipxSocketAddr, 2);
> + addr.f0 = be32_to_cpu(*ipxNetAddr);
> + memcpy(networkAddr+1, addr.f1, 4);
> + addr.f0 ^= addr.f0;
What on earth????
> + addr.f0 = be16_to_cpu(*ipxSocketAddr);
I'm so puzzled.
> + memcpy(networkAddr+5, addr.f1, 2);
This patch is really weird so I'm done reviewing it.
regards,
dan carpenter
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-08-02 14:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-07-30 18:14 [PATCH] staging: r8188eu: Fix different base types in assignments and parameters Fabio M. De Francesco
2021-08-02 14:05 ` Dan Carpenter [this message]
2021-08-02 14:26 ` Fabio M. De Francesco
2021-08-02 15:21 ` Fabio M. De Francesco
2021-08-03 8:15 ` Fabio M. De Francesco
2021-08-03 14:01 ` Dan Carpenter
2021-08-04 7:59 ` Dan Carpenter
2021-08-04 9:00 ` Fabio M. De Francesco
2021-08-04 9:58 ` Dan Carpenter
2021-08-04 11:29 ` Fabio M. De Francesco
2021-08-04 12:00 ` Dan Carpenter
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=20210802140505.GZ1931@kadam \
--to=dan.carpenter@oracle.com \
--cc=Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net \
--cc=fmdefrancesco@gmail.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-staging@lists.linux.dev \
/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