From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Brent Pappas <bpappas@pappasbrent.com>
Cc: linux-staging@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Brent Pappas <pappasbrent@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: rtl8723bs: core: Replace macros RotR1 through Mk16 with static inline functions
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2022 07:28:31 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y045f/UzV8Dx5tpp@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221017171653.12578-1-bpappas@pappasbrent.com>
On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 01:16:54PM -0400, Brent Pappas wrote:
> From: Brent Pappas <pappasbrent@gmail.com>
>
> Replace macros "RotR1", "Lo8", "Hi8", "Lo16", "Hi16", and "Mk16" with
> static inline functions to comply with Linux coding style standards.
>
> Signed-off-by: Brent Pappas <bpappas@pappasbrent.com>
> ---
> drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_security.c | 35 +++++++++++++++----
> 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_security.c b/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_security.c
> index ac731415f733..519e141fb82c 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_security.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_security.c
> @@ -253,12 +253,35 @@ void rtw_seccalctkipmic(u8 *key, u8 *header, u8 *data, u32 data_len, u8 *mic_cod
> }
>
> /* macros for extraction/creation of unsigned char/unsigned short values */
> -#define RotR1(v16) ((((v16) >> 1) & 0x7FFF) ^ (((v16) & 1) << 15))
> -#define Lo8(v16) ((u8)((v16) & 0x00FF))
> -#define Hi8(v16) ((u8)(((v16) >> 8) & 0x00FF))
> -#define Lo16(v32) ((u16)((v32) & 0xFFFF))
> -#define Hi16(v32) ((u16)(((v32) >> 16) & 0xFFFF))
> -#define Mk16(hi, lo) ((lo) ^ (((u16)(hi)) << 8))
> +static inline u16 RotR1(u16 v16)
> +{
> + return ((((v16) >> 1) & 0x7FFF) ^ (((v16) & 1) << 15));
> +}
> +
> +static inline u8 Lo8(u16 v16)
> +{
> + return ((u8)((v16) & 0x00FF));
Odd use of spaces, doesn't checkpatch complain about this?
But the larger question is, don't we already have functions for this in
the core kernel? Why not just use them instead of hand-rolling custom
functions instead?
thanks,
greg k-h
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-10-18 5:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-10-17 17:16 [PATCH] staging: rtl8723bs: core: Replace macros RotR1 through Mk16 with static inline functions Brent Pappas
2022-10-18 5:28 ` Greg KH [this message]
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=Y045f/UzV8Dx5tpp@kroah.com \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=bpappas@pappasbrent.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-staging@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=pappasbrent@gmail.com \
/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