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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 10:38:47 +0900 From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com> To: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@...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, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] regulator: s2mps11: Simplify expression used in BUILD_BUG_ON On 18.02.2016 10:37, Andi Shyti wrote: > Hi Krzysztof, > >> 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> >> > > [...] > >> case S2MPS11X: >> s2mps11->rdev_num = ARRAY_SIZE(s2mps11_regulators); > > Why don't we remove rdev_num at all? It's not used that much > other than in the probe function. Remove from probe? It is used in probe and removal would make the code more complicated than it should be. Best regards, Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists