linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] power: gpio-charger: add device tree support

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 23 Sep 2014 08:59:43 -0700
From:	Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
To:	Heiko Stübner <heiko@...ech.de>
Cc:	sre@...nel.org, Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <dbaryshkov@...il.com>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
	"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
	Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
	Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] power: gpio-charger: add device tree support

Heiko,

On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 5:03 AM, Heiko Stübner <heiko@...ech.de> wrote:
> Am Montag, 22. September 2014, 09:48:33 schrieb Doug Anderson:
>> > @@ -196,6 +255,7 @@ static struct platform_driver gpio_charger_driver = {
>> >
>> >                 .name = "gpio-charger",
>> >                 .owner = THIS_MODULE,
>> >                 .pm = &gpio_charger_pm_ops,
>> >
>> > +               .of_match_table = of_match_ptr(gpio_charger_match),
>>
>> Given that you don't have any #ifdefs with "CONFIG_OF", I think
>> gpio_charger_match will always exist.  It seems like you should remove
>> the of_match_ptr or add some #ifdefs.  I can't quite keep up with what
>> the currently suggested best practice is here, though.
>
> I've kept the of_match_ptr in v3. The dt parsing functions (of_read_foo,...)
> define stubs for the !CONFIG_OF case which we use here in this case and
> of_match_ptr is also defined differently for both OF and !OF, so it feels like
> it should be there ;-)

...I was thinking you'd get a compile-time warning about
gpio_charger_match not being used.  ...but I can't seem to trigger it
with my compiler settings.  In any case, I'm fairly certain that in
the !CONFIG_OF case (plus non-module case) that "gpio_charger_match"
will be defined but not used in your code.

I was under the impression that of_match_ptr was defined differently
for OF and !OF so that you could use it in the case where the
structure itself (gpio_charger_match) had #ifdefs around it...
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/