Re: [PATCH] mac80211: Directly use ida_alloc()/free()

Re: [PATCH] mac80211: Directly use ida_alloc()/free()

[Christophe JAILLET]

Hi,

Le 27/05/2022 à 09:41, keliu a écrit :
> Use ida_alloc()/ida_free() instead of deprecated
> ida_simple_get()/ida_simple_remove() .
> 
> Signed-off-by: keliu <liuke94-hv44wF8Li93QT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
> ---
>   drivers/net/wireless/mac80211_hwsim.c | 6 +++---
>   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/mac80211_hwsim.c b/drivers/net/wireless/mac80211_hwsim.c
> index e9ec63e0e395..6ad884d9e9a4 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/mac80211_hwsim.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/mac80211_hwsim.c
> @@ -290,8 +290,8 @@ static inline int hwsim_net_set_netgroup(struct net *net)
>   {
>   	struct hwsim_net *hwsim_net = net_generic(net, hwsim_net_id);
>   
> -	hwsim_net->netgroup = ida_simple_get(&hwsim_netgroup_ida,
> -					     0, 0, GFP_KERNEL);
> +	hwsim_net->netgroup = ida_alloc(&hwsim_netgroup_ida,
> +					     GFP_KERNEL);
Nitpick: GFP_KERNEL should be on the same line if there is enough space 
or aligned with &hwsim_netgroup_ida


Out of curiosity, how do you generate these patches?
(coccinelle should be the perfect tool for it, but I thought it would 
already deal with alignment)

CJ

>   	return hwsim_net->netgroup >= 0 ? 0 : -ENOMEM;
>   }
>   
> @@ -4733,7 +4733,7 @@ static void __net_exit hwsim_exit_net(struct net *net)
>   					 NULL);
>   	}
>   
> -	ida_simple_remove(&hwsim_netgroup_ida, hwsim_net_get_netgroup(net));
> +	ida_free(&hwsim_netgroup_ida, hwsim_net_get_netgroup(net));
>   }
>   
>   static struct pernet_operations hwsim_net_ops = {

[PATCH] mac80211: Directly use ida_alloc()/free()

[keliu]

Use ida_alloc()/ida_free() instead of deprecated
ida_simple_get()/ida_simple_remove() .

Signed-off-by: keliu <liuke94@huawei.com>
---
 drivers/net/wireless/mac80211_hwsim.c | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/mac80211_hwsim.c b/drivers/net/wireless/mac80211_hwsim.c
index e9ec63e0e395..6ad884d9e9a4 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/mac80211_hwsim.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/mac80211_hwsim.c
@@ -290,8 +290,8 @@ static inline int hwsim_net_set_netgroup(struct net *net)
 {
 	struct hwsim_net *hwsim_net = net_generic(net, hwsim_net_id);
 
-	hwsim_net->netgroup = ida_simple_get(&hwsim_netgroup_ida,
-					     0, 0, GFP_KERNEL);
+	hwsim_net->netgroup = ida_alloc(&hwsim_netgroup_ida,
+					     GFP_KERNEL);
 	return hwsim_net->netgroup >= 0 ? 0 : -ENOMEM;
 }
 
@@ -4733,7 +4733,7 @@ static void __net_exit hwsim_exit_net(struct net *net)
 					 NULL);
 	}
 
-	ida_simple_remove(&hwsim_netgroup_ida, hwsim_net_get_netgroup(net));
+	ida_free(&hwsim_netgroup_ida, hwsim_net_get_netgroup(net));
 }
 
 static struct pernet_operations hwsim_net_ops = {
-- 
2.25.1

Re: [PATCH] mac80211: Directly use ida_alloc()/free()

[Kalle Valo]

Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr> writes:

> Le 27/05/2022 à 09:41, keliu a écrit :
>> Use ida_alloc()/ida_free() instead of deprecated
>> ida_simple_get()/ida_simple_remove() .
>>
>> Signed-off-by: keliu <liuke94-hv44wF8Li93QT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>

Heh, this email address got me confused :) I guess you (Christophe) use
gmane and it's just some obfuscation done by gmane?

-- 
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/

https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches

Re: [PATCH] mac80211: Directly use ida_alloc()/free()

[Christophe JAILLET]

Le 27/05/2022 à 09:42, Kalle Valo a écrit :
> Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr> writes:
> 
>> Le 27/05/2022 à 09:41, keliu a écrit :
>>> Use ida_alloc()/ida_free() instead of deprecated
>>> ida_simple_get()/ida_simple_remove() .
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: keliu <liuke94-hv44wF8Li93QT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
> 
> Heh, this email address got me confused :) I guess you (Christophe) use
> gmane and it's just some obfuscation done by gmane?
> 

Yes, I use gname and thunderbird as a client. I also think that it is 
some obfuscation done by gname.

This kind of obfuscation is not done on all messages, and not done 
consistently on the message of the same ML. I don't know the rule that 
is applied.

CJ