On Tue, 8 May 2012 21:56:48 -0700 Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Use the new bool function ether_addr_equal to add > some clarity and reduce the likelihood for misuse > of compare_ether_addr for sorting. > > Done via cocci script: > > $ cat compare_ether_addr.cocci > @@ > expression a,b; > @@ > - !compare_ether_addr(a, b) > + ether_addr_equal(a, b) > > @@ > expression a,b; > @@ > - compare_ether_addr(a, b) > + !ether_addr_equal(a, b) > > @@ > expression a,b; > @@ > - !ether_addr_equal(a, b) == 0 > + ether_addr_equal(a, b) > > @@ > expression a,b; > @@ > - !ether_addr_equal(a, b) != 0 > + !ether_addr_equal(a, b) > > @@ > expression a,b; > @@ > - ether_addr_equal(a, b) == 0 > + !ether_addr_equal(a, b) > > @@ > expression a,b; > @@ > - ether_addr_equal(a, b) != 0 > + ether_addr_equal(a, b) > > @@ > expression a,b; > @@ > - !!ether_addr_equal(a, b) > + ether_addr_equal(a, b) > > Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > net/bridge/netfilter/ebt_stp.c | 4 ++-- > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/net/bridge/netfilter/ebt_stp.c b/net/bridge/netfilter/ebt_stp.c > index 5b33a2e..071d872 100644 > --- a/net/bridge/netfilter/ebt_stp.c > +++ b/net/bridge/netfilter/ebt_stp.c > @@ -164,8 +164,8 @@ static int ebt_stp_mt_check(const struct xt_mtchk_param *par) > !(info->bitmask & EBT_STP_MASK)) > return -EINVAL; > /* Make sure the match only receives stp frames */ > - if (compare_ether_addr(e->destmac, bridge_ula) || > - compare_ether_addr(e->destmsk, msk) || !(e->bitmask & EBT_DESTMAC)) > + if (!ether_addr_equal(e->destmac, bridge_ula) || > + !ether_addr_equal(e->destmsk, msk) || !(e->bitmask & EBT_DESTMAC)) > return -EINVAL; > > return 0; All look good. Acked-by: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@xxxxxxxxxx> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
