UBI: replace memcpy with struct assignment
This kind of memcpy() is error-prone. Its replacement with a struct
assignment is prefered because it's type-safe and much easier to read.
Found by coccinelle. Hand patched and reviewed.
Tested by compilation only.
A simplified version of the semantic match that finds this problem is as
follows: (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
// <smpl>
@@
identifier struct_name;
struct struct_name to;
struct struct_name from;
expression E;
@@
-memcpy(&(to), &(from), E);
+to = from;
// </smpl>
Signed-off-by: Peter Senna Tschudin <peter.senna@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Ezequiel Garcia <elezegarcia@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Artem Bityutskiy <artem.bityutskiy@linux.intel.com>
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/ubi/upd.c b/drivers/mtd/ubi/upd.c
index 9f2ebd8..ec2c2dc 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/ubi/upd.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/ubi/upd.c
@@ -64,8 +64,7 @@
return 0;
}
- memcpy(&vtbl_rec, &ubi->vtbl[vol->vol_id],
- sizeof(struct ubi_vtbl_record));
+ vtbl_rec = ubi->vtbl[vol->vol_id];
vtbl_rec.upd_marker = 1;
mutex_lock(&ubi->device_mutex);
@@ -93,8 +92,7 @@
dbg_gen("clear update marker for volume %d", vol->vol_id);
- memcpy(&vtbl_rec, &ubi->vtbl[vol->vol_id],
- sizeof(struct ubi_vtbl_record));
+ vtbl_rec = ubi->vtbl[vol->vol_id];
ubi_assert(vol->upd_marker && vtbl_rec.upd_marker);
vtbl_rec.upd_marker = 0;