linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] regulator: core: Fix build error due to const qualifier for ops

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]

Message-ID: <20140820151741.GU24407@sirena.org.uk>
Date:	Wed, 20 Aug 2014 10:17:41 -0500
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:	Axel Lin <axel.lin@...ics.com>
Cc:	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
	Guodong Xu <guodong.xu@...aro.org>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: core: Fix build error due to const qualifier
 for ops

On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 10:51:33AM +0800, Axel Lin wrote:

> As I mentioned in the commit log:
>     Drop const qualifier for ops of struct regulator_desc.
>     Allow regulator drivers to update ops before registering regulator.
>     So I don't think it's necessary to add const for ops in struct
> regulator_desc.
>     (I think the original point was the "regulator core" won't modify the ops).

> The fix is either drop the 'const' qualifier in hi6421-regulator driver or
> add back const qualifier for ops of struct regulator_desc in
> include/linux/regulator/driver.h.
> Which one do you prefer?

Adding back the const qualifier.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (820 bytes)