linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 1/4] mfd: bd71837: mfd driver for ROHM BD71837 PMIC

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

Message-ID: <20180626120306.GD2118@localhost.localdomain>
Date:   Tue, 26 Jun 2018 15:03:06 +0300
From:   Matti Vaittinen <matti.vaittinen@...rohmeurope.com>
To:     Enric Balletbo Serra <eballetbo@...il.com>
Cc:     Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>, sboyd@...nel.org,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, mazziesaccount@...il.com,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
        Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>, chenjh@...k-chips.com,
        andrew.smirnov@...il.com, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Kate Stewart <kstewart@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Heiko Stübner <heiko@...ech.de>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-input@...r.kernel.org, mikko.mutanen@...rohmeurope.com,
        heikki.haikola@...rohmeurope.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/4] mfd: bd71837: mfd driver for ROHM BD71837 PMIC

Hello Again Eric,

On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 01:40:40PM +0200, Enric Balletbo Serra wrote:
> Hi Matti,
> Missatge de Matti Vaittinen <matti.vaittinen@...rohmeurope.com> del
> dia dt., 26 de juny 2018 a les 13:25:
> > On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 11:06:33AM +0200, Enric Balletbo Serra wrote:
> > > Missatge de Matti Vaittinen <matti.vaittinen@...rohmeurope.com> del
> > > dia dt., 19 de juny 2018 a les 12:57:
> >
> > > > +static const struct of_device_id bd71837_of_match[] = {
> > > > +       { .compatible = "rohm,bd71837", .data = (void *)0},
> > > > +       { },
> > >
> > > nit: { /* sentinel */ }
> >
> > I am sorry but I didn't quite get the point here. Could you please
> > explain what did you expect to be added here?
> >
> 
> It's a nit but It is a good practice to specify that the last entry is
> a sentinel. Just this.
> 
> +static const struct of_device_id bd71837_of_match[] = {
> +       { .compatible = "rohm,bd71837", .data = (void *)0},
> +       { /* sentinel */ }
> +};

Oh, I see. Finally something I can disagree =) I quickly opened few
random drivers which declare match table. None of them practiced this
good practice. So I guess it is not such a standard after all. And I
guess the meaning of last entry in match table should be quite obvious.
Adding the comment /* sentinel */ sounds like stating the obvious at
best - at worst it gets one just to wonder what the "sentinel" means =)

> 
> And just noticed, is .data = (void *)0 really required?
 
As static structs should be initialized to zero I'd say it is not
required. Will remove this. Thanks for pointing this out.

Br,
	Matti Vaittinen