linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ALSA: sound/isa: constify snd_kcontrol

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAOH+1jETefO4XbL-mV+VCfQ6aQsV_DGoPQ0YFDG5L6EyinSp=A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 22 May 2017 12:01:43 +0530
From:   Bhumika Goyal <bhumirks@...il.com>
To:     Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>
Cc:     Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>, alsa-devel@...a-project.org,
        perex@...ex.cz, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ALSA: sound/isa: constify snd_kcontrol_new structures

On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 11:59 AM, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de> wrote:
> On Mon, 22 May 2017 08:20:45 +0200,
> Julia Lawall wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 22 May 2017, Bhumika Goyal wrote:
>>
>> > On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 12:39 PM, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de> wrote:
>> > > On Wed, 17 May 2017 14:33:45 +0200,
>> > > Bhumika Goyal wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 5:50 PM, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de> wrote:
>> > >> > On Wed, 17 May 2017 13:38:56 +0200,
>> > >> > Bhumika Goyal wrote:
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >> Declare snd_kcontrol_new structures as const as they are only passed an
>> > >> >> argument to the function snd_ctl_new1. This argument is of type const,
>> > >> >> so snd_kcontrol_new structures having this property can be made const.
>> > >> >> Done using Coccinelle:
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >> @r disable optional_qualifier@
>> > >> >> identifier x;
>> > >> >> position p;
>> > >> >> @@
>> > >> >> static struct snd_kcontrol_new x@......};
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >> @ok@
>> > >> >> identifier r.x;
>> > >> >> position p;
>> > >> >> @@
>> > >> >> snd_ctl_new1(&x@p,...)
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >> @bad@
>> > >> >> position p != {r.p,ok.p};
>> > >> >> identifier r.x;
>> > >> >> @@
>> > >> >> x@p
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >> @depends on !bad disable optional_qualifier@
>> > >> >> identifier r.x;
>> > >> >> @@
>> > >> >> +const
>> > >> >> struct snd_kcontrol_new x;
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >> Signed-off-by: Bhumika Goyal <bhumirks@...il.com>
>> > >> >
>> > >> > As I already asked, could you send as a patchset if you have multiple
>> > >> > similar patches?
>> > >> >
>> > >>
>> > >> Sure. Will combine the already sent ones and some new ones into a
>> > >> patchset and send again.
>> > >
>> > > Well, since there haven't been new submissions and the patches are
>> > > trivial, I applied the existing four patches.  If you have newer ones,
>> > > please submit as a patchset.
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> > Hey,
>> >
>> > Thanks for applying the patches.
>> > I have a doubt that since some of my coming patches are for the sound
>> > subsystem containing similar changes and you will be applying those,
>> > so can I combine and put all the changes in a single patch or sending
>> > a patchset would be a correct way.
>>
>> I think he means that when you have more sound patches, just do them all
>> at once.
>
> Yes, that's my point.
>
> You've sent each patch individually, and this made me difficult to
> pick up, as I had to wonder "is this really all?" (then 10 minutes
> later another patch arrived :)
>
> At best, submit all the relevant patches via git-send-email with the
> proper cover letter in a single thread.
>

Thanks Julia and Takashi for clearing my doubt. I will keep this point
in mind for my future patches :)

Thanks,
Bhumika
>
> thanks,
>
> Takashi