linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] staging: vboxvideo: Remove chekpatch issues

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]

Date:   Fri, 26 Oct 2018 12:34:33 +0200
From:   Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
To:     Shayenne da Luz Moura <shayenneluzmoura@...il.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Michael Thayer <michael.thayer@...cle.com>
Cc:     devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        outreachy-kernel@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] staging: vboxvideo: Remove chekpatch issues

Hi,

On 25-10-18 21:40, Shayenne da Luz Moura wrote:
> This series cleans the following checkpatch.pl issues:
> 
> CHECK: Prefer kernel type 'u32' over 'uint32_t'
> CHECK: Avoid using bool structure members because of possible alignment issues
> 
> Shayenne da Luz Moura (2):
>    staging: vboxvideo: Change uint32_t to u32
>    staging: vboxvideo: Use unsigned int instead bool

Why am I receiving only the cover letter of this series? Please resend
so that I get all the patches.

Also at least the first patch is wrong, the drm headers use uint32_t
in the prototype definition of the callback functions we are defining,
so the vboxvideo code should use the same even if the compiler does not
warn about the callback implementation having different parameter types
in this case.

Regards,

Hans




> 
>   drivers/staging/vboxvideo/vbox_drv.h        | 14 +++++++-------
>   drivers/staging/vboxvideo/vbox_mode.c       |  2 +-
>   drivers/staging/vboxvideo/vboxvideo_guest.h |  2 +-
>   3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>