linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] clocksource: j-core: type fix init function return code

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]

Date:	Thu, 28 Jul 2016 03:02:45 -0400
From:	Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:	Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clocksource: j-core: type fix init function return code

On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 10:00:50AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wednesday, July 27, 2016 1:25:33 AM CEST Rich Felker wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 02:31:29PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > The CLOCKSOURCE_OF_DECLARE now takes a function that returns an 'int', but a this
> > > new clocksource driver has just appeared in linux-next and causes a warning because
> > > it has the old 'void' return value:
> > > 
> > > In file included from ../include/linux/clocksource.h:18:0,
> > >                  from ../include/linux/clockchips.h:13,
> > >                  from ../drivers/clocksource/jcore-pit.c:14:
> > > include/linux/of.h:1006:20: error: comparison of distinct pointer types lacks a cast [-Werror]
> > >         .data = (fn == (fn_type)NULL) ? fn : fn  }
> > >                     ^
> > > 
> > > This adapts the jcore_pit_init() function to the correct return type.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
> > > Fixes: e0aa0655c60b ("clocksource: add J-Core timer/clocksource driver")
> > > ---
> > > The patch that introduces the warnign currently only exists in the linux-sh git
> > > tree and showed up in linux-next this week.
> > 
> > I've removed the commit from my for-next branch since it's not
> > appropriate to go upstream through my tree. Your patch should still be
> > applied in the proper subsystem tree, though, I think. Daniel?
> 
> I think the way to do it now is to fold my patch into your driver and submit
> it to the clocksource git on top of the API change.

Done.

Rich