linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] regulator: s2mps11: Simplify expression used in BUILD_BUG

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: <2870104.0q2mccK2EB@wuerfel>
Date:	Thu, 18 Feb 2016 10:06:28 +0100
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>
Cc:	Sangbeom Kim <sbkim73@...sung.com>,
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org, jacob.e.keller@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] regulator: s2mps11: Simplify expression used in BUILD_BUG_ON

On Thursday 18 February 2016 09:35:07 Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> Following BUILD_BUG_ON using a variable fails for some of the compilers
> and optimization levels (reported for gcc 4.9):
>         var = ARRAY_SIZE(s2mps15_regulators);
>         BUILD_BUG_ON(S2MPS_REGULATOR_MAX < var);
> Fix this by using ARRAY_SIZE directly.
> 
> Additionally add missing BUILD_BUG_ON check for S2MPS15 device (the
> check ensures that internal arrays are big enough to hold data for all
> of regulators on all devices).
> 
> Reported-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>

I've verified that this is the exact patch I have successfully tested
on locally and in Olof's autobuilder which reported the problem.

>         case S2MPS15X:
>                 s2mps11->rdev_num = ARRAY_SIZE(s2mps15_regulators);
>                 regulators = s2mps15_regulators;
> +               BUILD_BUG_ON(S2MPS_REGULATOR_MAX < ARRAY_SIZE(s2mps15_regulators));
>                 break;
> 

My version did not add this line, but it seems correct.

Tested-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>