There are multiple places using CRYPTO_MSG_BASE to calculate the index,
so use macro CRYPTO_MSG_INDEX() instead for better readability.
Signed-off-by: Yunfeng Ye <[email protected]>
---
crypto/crypto_user_base.c | 28 ++++++++++++++--------------
include/uapi/linux/cryptouser.h | 1 +
2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
diff --git a/crypto/crypto_user_base.c b/crypto/crypto_user_base.c
index 910e0b4..4c8cac4 100644
--- a/crypto/crypto_user_base.c
+++ b/crypto/crypto_user_base.c
@@ -387,12 +387,12 @@ static int crypto_del_rng(struct sk_buff *skb, struct nlmsghdr *nlh,
#define MSGSIZE(type) sizeof(struct type)
static const int crypto_msg_min[CRYPTO_NR_MSGTYPES] = {
- [CRYPTO_MSG_NEWALG - CRYPTO_MSG_BASE] = MSGSIZE(crypto_user_alg),
- [CRYPTO_MSG_DELALG - CRYPTO_MSG_BASE] = MSGSIZE(crypto_user_alg),
- [CRYPTO_MSG_UPDATEALG - CRYPTO_MSG_BASE] = MSGSIZE(crypto_user_alg),
- [CRYPTO_MSG_GETALG - CRYPTO_MSG_BASE] = MSGSIZE(crypto_user_alg),
- [CRYPTO_MSG_DELRNG - CRYPTO_MSG_BASE] = 0,
- [CRYPTO_MSG_GETSTAT - CRYPTO_MSG_BASE] = MSGSIZE(crypto_user_alg),
+ [CRYPTO_MSG_INDEX(CRYPTO_MSG_NEWALG)] = MSGSIZE(crypto_user_alg),
+ [CRYPTO_MSG_INDEX(CRYPTO_MSG_DELALG)] = MSGSIZE(crypto_user_alg),
+ [CRYPTO_MSG_INDEX(CRYPTO_MSG_UPDATEALG)] = MSGSIZE(crypto_user_alg),
+ [CRYPTO_MSG_INDEX(CRYPTO_MSG_GETALG)] = MSGSIZE(crypto_user_alg),
+ [CRYPTO_MSG_INDEX(CRYPTO_MSG_DELRNG)] = 0,
+ [CRYPTO_MSG_INDEX(CRYPTO_MSG_GETSTAT)] = MSGSIZE(crypto_user_alg),
};
static const struct nla_policy crypto_policy[CRYPTOCFGA_MAX+1] = {
@@ -406,14 +406,14 @@ static int crypto_del_rng(struct sk_buff *skb, struct nlmsghdr *nlh,
int (*dump)(struct sk_buff *, struct netlink_callback *);
int (*done)(struct netlink_callback *);
} crypto_dispatch[CRYPTO_NR_MSGTYPES] = {
- [CRYPTO_MSG_NEWALG - CRYPTO_MSG_BASE] = { .doit = crypto_add_alg},
- [CRYPTO_MSG_DELALG - CRYPTO_MSG_BASE] = { .doit = crypto_del_alg},
- [CRYPTO_MSG_UPDATEALG - CRYPTO_MSG_BASE] = { .doit = crypto_update_alg},
- [CRYPTO_MSG_GETALG - CRYPTO_MSG_BASE] = { .doit = crypto_report,
+ [CRYPTO_MSG_INDEX(CRYPTO_MSG_NEWALG)] = { .doit = crypto_add_alg},
+ [CRYPTO_MSG_INDEX(CRYPTO_MSG_DELALG)] = { .doit = crypto_del_alg},
+ [CRYPTO_MSG_INDEX(CRYPTO_MSG_UPDATEALG)] = { .doit = crypto_update_alg},
+ [CRYPTO_MSG_INDEX(CRYPTO_MSG_GETALG)] = { .doit = crypto_report,
.dump = crypto_dump_report,
.done = crypto_dump_report_done},
- [CRYPTO_MSG_DELRNG - CRYPTO_MSG_BASE] = { .doit = crypto_del_rng },
- [CRYPTO_MSG_GETSTAT - CRYPTO_MSG_BASE] = { .doit = crypto_reportstat},
+ [CRYPTO_MSG_INDEX(CRYPTO_MSG_DELRNG)] = { .doit = crypto_del_rng },
+ [CRYPTO_MSG_INDEX(CRYPTO_MSG_GETSTAT)] = { .doit = crypto_reportstat},
};
static int crypto_user_rcv_msg(struct sk_buff *skb, struct nlmsghdr *nlh,
@@ -428,10 +428,10 @@ static int crypto_user_rcv_msg(struct sk_buff *skb, struct nlmsghdr *nlh,
if (type > CRYPTO_MSG_MAX)
return -EINVAL;
- type -= CRYPTO_MSG_BASE;
+ type = CRYPTO_MSG_INDEX(type);
link = &crypto_dispatch[type];
- if ((type == (CRYPTO_MSG_GETALG - CRYPTO_MSG_BASE) &&
+ if ((type == CRYPTO_MSG_INDEX(CRYPTO_MSG_GETALG) &&
(nlh->nlmsg_flags & NLM_F_DUMP))) {
struct crypto_alg *alg;
unsigned long dump_alloc = 0;
diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/cryptouser.h b/include/uapi/linux/cryptouser.h
index 5730c67..8a5fe9c 100644
--- a/include/uapi/linux/cryptouser.h
+++ b/include/uapi/linux/cryptouser.h
@@ -37,6 +37,7 @@ enum {
};
#define CRYPTO_MSG_MAX (__CRYPTO_MSG_MAX - 1)
#define CRYPTO_NR_MSGTYPES (CRYPTO_MSG_MAX + 1 - CRYPTO_MSG_BASE)
+#define CRYPTO_MSG_INDEX(x) ((x) - CRYPTO_MSG_BASE)
#define CRYPTO_MAX_NAME 64
--
1.8.3.1
On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 07:07:36PM +0800, Yunfeng Ye wrote:
> There are multiple places using CRYPTO_MSG_BASE to calculate the index,
> so use macro CRYPTO_MSG_INDEX() instead for better readability.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yunfeng Ye <[email protected]>
I don't think your patch makes it any more readable.
Cheers,
--
Email: Herbert Xu <[email protected]>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
On 2019/12/10 21:39, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 07:07:36PM +0800, Yunfeng Ye wrote:
>> There are multiple places using CRYPTO_MSG_BASE to calculate the index,
>> so use macro CRYPTO_MSG_INDEX() instead for better readability.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Yunfeng Ye <[email protected]>
>
> I don't think your patch makes it any more readable.
>
ok, thanks, I think use macro instead of the same index calculation
logic is more clear.
> Cheers,
>