linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] mfd: tps6586x: add version detection

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

Date:	Wed, 4 Dec 2013 11:49:09 +0000
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Cc:	Stefan Agner <stefan@...er.ch>, swarren@...dotorg.org,
	thierry.reding@...il.com, dev@...xeye.de, lgirdwood@...il.com,
	kai.poggensee@...onic-design.de, sameo@...ux.intel.com,
	linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] mfd: tps6586x: add version detection

On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 10:07:28AM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Dec 2013, Stefan Agner wrote:

> > As I pointed out in the comment above, the struct tps6586x is in the C
> > file, so I would need to move that too. That's why I did not made that
> > change in the end. What do you think, should I still move (and move the
> > struct too?) 

> Why would the struct have to be moved if the function is inline?

If the function is in the header and trying to use a struct that's only
defined in the C file then it's not going to build - keeping the struct
in the C file only does seem like a worthwhile thing for encapsulation.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)