sizeof(u8) is always 1.
Signed-off-by: Fabian Frederick <[email protected]>
---
drivers/net/wireless/b43/ppr.c | 2 +-
drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/pcie/trans.c | 2 +-
drivers/net/wireless/rtlwifi/efuse.c | 16 ++++++++--------
3 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/b43/ppr.c b/drivers/net/wireless/b43/ppr.c
index 9a77027..6bc1c6f 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/b43/ppr.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/b43/ppr.c
@@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ void b43_ppr_clear(struct b43_wldev *dev, struct b43_ppr *ppr)
memset(ppr, 0, sizeof(*ppr));
/* Compile-time PPR check */
- BUILD_BUG_ON(sizeof(struct b43_ppr) != B43_PPR_RATES_NUM * sizeof(u8));
+ BUILD_BUG_ON(sizeof(struct b43_ppr) != B43_PPR_RATES_NUM);
}
void b43_ppr_add(struct b43_wldev *dev, struct b43_ppr *ppr, int diff)
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/pcie/trans.c b/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/pcie/trans.c
index 836725e..f016824 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/pcie/trans.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/pcie/trans.c
@@ -1157,7 +1157,7 @@ static void iwl_trans_pcie_configure(struct iwl_trans *trans,
trans_pcie->n_no_reclaim_cmds = trans_cfg->n_no_reclaim_cmds;
if (trans_pcie->n_no_reclaim_cmds)
memcpy(trans_pcie->no_reclaim_cmds, trans_cfg->no_reclaim_cmds,
- trans_pcie->n_no_reclaim_cmds * sizeof(u8));
+ trans_pcie->n_no_reclaim_cmds);
trans_pcie->rx_buf_size_8k = trans_cfg->rx_buf_size_8k;
if (trans_pcie->rx_buf_size_8k)
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/rtlwifi/efuse.c b/drivers/net/wireless/rtlwifi/efuse.c
index 0b4082c..a3135c5 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/rtlwifi/efuse.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/rtlwifi/efuse.c
@@ -251,8 +251,8 @@ void read_efuse(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, u16 _offset, u16 _size_byte, u8 *pbuf)
}
/* allocate memory for efuse_tbl and efuse_word */
- efuse_tbl = kzalloc(rtlpriv->cfg->maps[EFUSE_HWSET_MAX_SIZE] *
- sizeof(u8), GFP_ATOMIC);
+ efuse_tbl = kzalloc(rtlpriv->cfg->maps[EFUSE_HWSET_MAX_SIZE],
+ GFP_ATOMIC);
if (!efuse_tbl)
return;
efuse_word = kzalloc(EFUSE_MAX_WORD_UNIT * sizeof(u16 *), GFP_ATOMIC);
@@ -733,8 +733,8 @@ static int efuse_pg_packet_read(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, u8 offset, u8 *data)
if (offset > 15)
return false;
- memset(data, 0xff, PGPKT_DATA_SIZE * sizeof(u8));
- memset(tmpdata, 0xff, PGPKT_DATA_SIZE * sizeof(u8));
+ memset(data, 0xff, PGPKT_DATA_SIZE);
+ memset(tmpdata, 0xff, PGPKT_DATA_SIZE);
while (continual && (efuse_addr < EFUSE_MAX_SIZE)) {
if (readstate & PG_STATE_HEADER) {
@@ -772,7 +772,7 @@ static void efuse_write_data_case1(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, u16 *efuse_addr,
struct rtl_priv *rtlpriv = rtl_priv(hw);
struct pgpkt_struct tmp_pkt;
int dataempty = true;
- u8 originaldata[8 * sizeof(u8)];
+ u8 originaldata[8];
u8 badworden = 0x0F;
u8 match_word_en, tmp_word_en;
u8 tmpindex;
@@ -881,7 +881,7 @@ static void efuse_write_data_case2(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, u16 *efuse_addr,
struct pgpkt_struct tmp_pkt;
u8 pg_header;
u8 tmp_header;
- u8 originaldata[8 * sizeof(u8)];
+ u8 originaldata[8];
u8 tmp_word_cnts;
u8 badworden = 0x0F;
@@ -904,7 +904,7 @@ static void efuse_write_data_case2(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, u16 *efuse_addr,
tmp_word_cnts = efuse_calculate_word_cnts(tmp_pkt.word_en);
- memset(originaldata, 0xff, 8 * sizeof(u8));
+ memset(originaldata, 0xff, 8);
if (efuse_pg_packet_read(hw, tmp_pkt.offset, originaldata)) {
badworden = enable_efuse_data_write(hw,
@@ -962,7 +962,7 @@ static int efuse_pg_packet_write(struct ieee80211_hw *hw,
target_pkt.offset = offset;
target_pkt.word_en = word_en;
- memset(target_pkt.data, 0xFF, 8 * sizeof(u8));
+ memset(target_pkt.data, 0xFF, 8);
efuse_word_enable_data_read(word_en, data, target_pkt.data);
target_word_cnts = efuse_calculate_word_cnts(target_pkt.word_en);
--
1.9.3
> On 16 November 2014 at 23:33 Julian Calaby <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Fabian,
>
> On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 7:55 AM, Fabian Frederick <[email protected]> wrote:
> > sizeof(u8) is always 1.
>
> I thought that sizeof(*variable) was preferred over sizeof(type), so
> shouldn't these be switched to that format instead?
>
> (I know that this is all no-op, but it should reduce the potential for
> highly unlikely bugs in the future. Also, the extra processing is
> compile-time not run-time.)
>
> Thanks,
Hi Julian,
Of course but char/u8/s8... allocations never use it and result would be the
same:
factor 1 multiplication.
Those rare occurrences (+- 30 in the whole kernel) where we have
sizeof(u8/s8) is ambiguous.
Having a patch removing it gives a pointer...
If the developer meant something else, he will be able to fix it.
Regards,
Fabian
Hi Fabian,
On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 7:55 AM, Fabian Frederick <[email protected]> wrote:
> sizeof(u8) is always 1.
I thought that sizeof(*variable) was preferred over sizeof(type), so
shouldn't these be switched to that format instead?
(I know that this is all no-op, but it should reduce the potential for
highly unlikely bugs in the future. Also, the extra processing is
compile-time not run-time.)
Thanks,
Julian Calaby
> Signed-off-by: Fabian Frederick <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/net/wireless/b43/ppr.c | 2 +-
> drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/pcie/trans.c | 2 +-
> drivers/net/wireless/rtlwifi/efuse.c | 16 ++++++++--------
> 3 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/b43/ppr.c b/drivers/net/wireless/b43/ppr.c
> index 9a77027..6bc1c6f 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/b43/ppr.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/b43/ppr.c
> @@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ void b43_ppr_clear(struct b43_wldev *dev, struct b43_ppr *ppr)
> memset(ppr, 0, sizeof(*ppr));
>
> /* Compile-time PPR check */
> - BUILD_BUG_ON(sizeof(struct b43_ppr) != B43_PPR_RATES_NUM * sizeof(u8));
> + BUILD_BUG_ON(sizeof(struct b43_ppr) != B43_PPR_RATES_NUM);
> }
>
> void b43_ppr_add(struct b43_wldev *dev, struct b43_ppr *ppr, int diff)
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/pcie/trans.c b/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/pcie/trans.c
> index 836725e..f016824 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/pcie/trans.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/pcie/trans.c
> @@ -1157,7 +1157,7 @@ static void iwl_trans_pcie_configure(struct iwl_trans *trans,
> trans_pcie->n_no_reclaim_cmds = trans_cfg->n_no_reclaim_cmds;
> if (trans_pcie->n_no_reclaim_cmds)
> memcpy(trans_pcie->no_reclaim_cmds, trans_cfg->no_reclaim_cmds,
> - trans_pcie->n_no_reclaim_cmds * sizeof(u8));
> + trans_pcie->n_no_reclaim_cmds);
>
> trans_pcie->rx_buf_size_8k = trans_cfg->rx_buf_size_8k;
> if (trans_pcie->rx_buf_size_8k)
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/rtlwifi/efuse.c b/drivers/net/wireless/rtlwifi/efuse.c
> index 0b4082c..a3135c5 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/rtlwifi/efuse.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/rtlwifi/efuse.c
> @@ -251,8 +251,8 @@ void read_efuse(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, u16 _offset, u16 _size_byte, u8 *pbuf)
> }
>
> /* allocate memory for efuse_tbl and efuse_word */
> - efuse_tbl = kzalloc(rtlpriv->cfg->maps[EFUSE_HWSET_MAX_SIZE] *
> - sizeof(u8), GFP_ATOMIC);
> + efuse_tbl = kzalloc(rtlpriv->cfg->maps[EFUSE_HWSET_MAX_SIZE],
> + GFP_ATOMIC);
> if (!efuse_tbl)
> return;
> efuse_word = kzalloc(EFUSE_MAX_WORD_UNIT * sizeof(u16 *), GFP_ATOMIC);
> @@ -733,8 +733,8 @@ static int efuse_pg_packet_read(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, u8 offset, u8 *data)
> if (offset > 15)
> return false;
>
> - memset(data, 0xff, PGPKT_DATA_SIZE * sizeof(u8));
> - memset(tmpdata, 0xff, PGPKT_DATA_SIZE * sizeof(u8));
> + memset(data, 0xff, PGPKT_DATA_SIZE);
> + memset(tmpdata, 0xff, PGPKT_DATA_SIZE);
>
> while (continual && (efuse_addr < EFUSE_MAX_SIZE)) {
> if (readstate & PG_STATE_HEADER) {
> @@ -772,7 +772,7 @@ static void efuse_write_data_case1(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, u16 *efuse_addr,
> struct rtl_priv *rtlpriv = rtl_priv(hw);
> struct pgpkt_struct tmp_pkt;
> int dataempty = true;
> - u8 originaldata[8 * sizeof(u8)];
> + u8 originaldata[8];
> u8 badworden = 0x0F;
> u8 match_word_en, tmp_word_en;
> u8 tmpindex;
> @@ -881,7 +881,7 @@ static void efuse_write_data_case2(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, u16 *efuse_addr,
> struct pgpkt_struct tmp_pkt;
> u8 pg_header;
> u8 tmp_header;
> - u8 originaldata[8 * sizeof(u8)];
> + u8 originaldata[8];
> u8 tmp_word_cnts;
> u8 badworden = 0x0F;
>
> @@ -904,7 +904,7 @@ static void efuse_write_data_case2(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, u16 *efuse_addr,
>
> tmp_word_cnts = efuse_calculate_word_cnts(tmp_pkt.word_en);
>
> - memset(originaldata, 0xff, 8 * sizeof(u8));
> + memset(originaldata, 0xff, 8);
>
> if (efuse_pg_packet_read(hw, tmp_pkt.offset, originaldata)) {
> badworden = enable_efuse_data_write(hw,
> @@ -962,7 +962,7 @@ static int efuse_pg_packet_write(struct ieee80211_hw *hw,
> target_pkt.offset = offset;
> target_pkt.word_en = word_en;
>
> - memset(target_pkt.data, 0xFF, 8 * sizeof(u8));
> + memset(target_pkt.data, 0xFF, 8);
>
> efuse_word_enable_data_read(word_en, data, target_pkt.data);
> target_word_cnts = efuse_calculate_word_cnts(target_pkt.word_en);
> --
> 1.9.3
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
Julian Calaby
Email: [email protected]
Profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/julian.calaby/
On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 06:56:27AM +0100, Fabian Frederick wrote:
>
>
> > On 16 November 2014 at 23:33 Julian Calaby <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Hi Fabian,
> >
> > On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 7:55 AM, Fabian Frederick <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > sizeof(u8) is always 1.
> >
> > I thought that sizeof(*variable) was preferred over sizeof(type), so
> > shouldn't these be switched to that format instead?
> >
> > (I know that this is all no-op, but it should reduce the potential for
> > highly unlikely bugs in the future. Also, the extra processing is
> > compile-time not run-time.)
> >
> > Thanks,
>
> Hi Julian,
>
> Of course but char/u8/s8... allocations never use it and result would be the
> same:
> factor 1 multiplication.
>
> Those rare occurrences (+- 30 in the whole kernel) where we have
> sizeof(u8/s8) is ambiguous.
>
> Having a patch removing it gives a pointer...
> If the developer meant something else, he will be able to fix it.
>
> Regards,
> Fabian
sizeof(*variable) still seems safer. Are the compilers unable to
optimize-away a "multiply by one"?
John
--
John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you
[email protected] might be all we have. Be ready.