linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] pwm: stm32: fix build warning with CONFIG_DMA

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: <CAK8P3a2=v5cazbSvdAMX8yf0x=PmCAQatQR6ZD=N0oM5-RGoUQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 12 Jun 2018 12:43:14 +0200
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:     Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc:     Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
        Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>,
        Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...com>,
        Linux PWM List <linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Benjamin Gaignard <benjamin.gaignard@...aro.org>,
        Fabrice Gasnier <fabrice.gasnier@...com>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pwm: stm32: fix build warning with CONFIG_DMA_ENGINE disabled

On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 9:25 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven
<geert@...ux-m68k.org> wrote:

>> --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-stm32.c
>> +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-stm32.c
>> @@ -484,9 +484,7 @@ static int stm32_pwm_apply_locked(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm,
>>  static const struct pwm_ops stm32pwm_ops = {
>>         .owner = THIS_MODULE,
>>         .apply = stm32_pwm_apply_locked,
>> -#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DMA_ENGINE)
>> -       .capture = stm32_pwm_capture,
>> -#endif
>> +       .capture = IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DMA_ENGINE) ? stm32_pwm_capture : NULL,
>
> Cool, I didn't know IS_ENABLED() can be used in static initializers.
> I guess it's too late/much work to use this trick in e.g. SET_*_PM_OPS(),
> as there are lots of places protecting the functions by #ifdefs?

It's one of those things I've been planning to do for a long time, but as
you noticed, we can't just change the macro but have to come up with a
replacement that works without those #ifdefs. Unfortunately, nobody has
come up with a good /name/ for those macros, which is still the main blocker ;-)

      Arnd