linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/11] Face lift for bu21013

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: <CACRpkdaTK0pybDM6So-E=weE_+uz8TSr=38YNzNQdqjZvnnYXw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 23 Aug 2019 13:30:22 +0200
From:   Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To:     Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
Cc:     Linux Input <linux-input@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/11] Face lift for bu21013_ts driver

On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 7:43 PM Dmitry Torokhov
<dmitry.torokhov@...il.com> wrote:

> The issue is this:
>
> static void bu21013_disable_chip(void *_ts)
> {
>         struct bu21013_ts *ts = ts;
>
> which shuts up gcc about the fact that 'ts' is uninitialized, it should
> have said "ts = _ts". I guess it is a lesson for me to not call the voi
> d pointer argument almost the same name as the structure, as it is easy
> to miss in the review. The compiler would not care in either case, but a
> human might have noticed.
>
> Can you please try making this change (and the same in power off
> handler)?

Yes this works! :)

Tested-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>

Yours,
Linus Walleij