linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v2 2/2] extcon: max8997: add missing const

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, 19 Mar 2013 19:29:07 +0900
From:	Jingoo Han <jg1.han@...sung.com>
To:	'Chanwoo Choi' <cw00.choi@...sung.com>
Cc:	'MyungJoo Ham' <myungjoo.ham@...sung.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 'Jingoo Han' <jg1.han@...sung.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 2/2] extcon: max8997: add missing const

On Tuesday, March 19, 2013 6:45 PM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
> 
> On 03/19/2013 02:31 PM, Jingoo Han wrote:
> > Fixed the checkpatch warning as below:
> >
> >   WARNING: static const char * array should probably be static const char * const
> >   #163: FILE: drivers/extcon/extcon-max8997.c:163:
> >   +static const char *max8997_extcon_cable[] = {
> >
> > Also, const is added to variable 'supported_cable' to prevent
> > build warning as below:
> >
> >   drivers/extcon/extcon-max8997.c: In function 'max8997_muic_probe':
> >   drivers/extcon/extcon-max8997.c:708:30: warning: assignment discards 'const' qualifier from pointer
> target type [enabled by
> > default]
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jingoo Han <jg1.han@...sung.com>
> > ---
> > Changes since v1:
> > - Added const to variable 'supported_cable'
> >
> >  drivers/extcon/extcon-max8997.c |    2 +-
> >  include/linux/extcon.h          |    2 +-
> >  2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/extcon/extcon-max8997.c b/drivers/extcon/extcon-max8997.c
> > index 20772ad..b82a591 100644
> > --- a/drivers/extcon/extcon-max8997.c
> > +++ b/drivers/extcon/extcon-max8997.c
> > @@ -160,7 +160,7 @@ enum {
> >  	_EXTCON_CABLE_NUM,
> >  };
> >
> > -static const char *max8997_extcon_cable[] = {
> > +static const char * const max8997_extcon_cable[] = {
> OK.
> >  	[EXTCON_CABLE_USB]			= "USB",
> >  	[EXTCON_CABLE_USB_HOST]			= "USB-Host",
> >  	[EXTCON_CABLE_TA]			= "TA",
> > diff --git a/include/linux/extcon.h b/include/linux/extcon.h
> > index fcb51c8..741a491 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/extcon.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/extcon.h
> > @@ -113,7 +113,7 @@ struct extcon_cable;
> >  struct extcon_dev {
> >  	/* --- Optional user initializing data --- */
> >  	const char	*name;
> > -	const char **supported_cable;
> > +	const char * const *supported_cable;
> I understand your intention to fix build warning.
> But, I don't agree this coding style. I think this coding
> style is not general method.

Um, how about the following?
In this case, there is no build warning and checkpatch warning.

-static const char *max8997_extcon_cable[] = {
+static char const *max8997_extcon_cable[] = {


> 
> Thanks,
> Chanwoo Choi
> 
> 


--
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/