linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: build warnings after merge of the akpm-current tree

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]

Message-Id: <20141003112154.92b5a47b2009293090d18f5a@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Fri, 3 Oct 2014 11:21:54 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@...a86.com>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
	Laura Abbott <lauraa@...eaurora.org>,
	Josh Cartwright <joshc@...eaurora.org>,
	Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
	Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build warnings after merge of the akpm-current tree

On Fri, 3 Oct 2014 17:30:04 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:

> Hi Andrew,
> 
> After merging the akpm-current tree, today's linux-next build (arm
> multi_v7_defconfig) produced these warnings:
> 
> drivers/base/dma-contiguous.c:244:2: warning: initialization from incompatible pointer type
>   .device_init = rmem_cma_device_init,
>   ^
> drivers/base/dma-contiguous.c:244:2: warning: (near initialization for 'rmem_cma_ops.device_init')
> drivers/base/dma-coherent.c:303:2: warning: initialization from incompatible pointer type
>   .device_init = rmem_dma_device_init,
>   ^
> 
> Introduced by commit e92f6296f3a2 ("drivers: dma-coherent: add
> initialization from device tree").  This init routine is supposed to
> return void ...

I'm a bit reluctant to just go in and change rmem_cma_device_init().

Why does it test for rmem->priv==NULL?  Can that really happen?  Why? 
Is it a legitimate state?

And why does dev_set_cma_area() test for dev==NULL?  Can that really
happen?  Is it legitimate?  Is all this stuff just papering over other
bugs?

The whole thing could do with a bit of an audit and cleanup, I suspect.
Get the states and initialization sequences and error checking all
sorted out, then get rid of all these tests for NULL.

--
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/