linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 11/11] lib/test_printf: Add tests for %pfw printk modifier

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]

Date:   Fri, 6 Sep 2019 10:00:36 +0300
From:   Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        rafael@...nel.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
        Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 11/11] lib/test_printf: Add tests for %pfw printk
 modifier

On Wed, Sep 04, 2019 at 08:22:22PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 04, 2019 at 07:10:51PM +0300, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 02, 2019 at 07:13:52PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 02, 2019 at 04:57:32PM +0300, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > > > Add a test for the %pfw printk modifier using software nodes.
> > > 
> > > > +static void __init fwnode_pointer(void)
> > > > +{
> > > > +	const struct software_node softnodes[] = {
> > > > +		{ .name = "first", },
> > > > +		{ .name = "second", .parent = &softnodes[0], },
> > > > +		{ .name = "third", .parent = &softnodes[1], },
> > > > +		{ NULL /* Guardian */ },
> > > 
> > > Comma is still here :-)
> > 
> > Oops. I ended up removing the comma in a wrong patch which wasn't submitted
> > to the list. Will fix for v6.
> 
> Also you may remove NULL there since it's default.

Then it'd become GCC specific. Albeit I'm not sure that's any kind of a
problem in practice. I guess Clang must cope with that, too? Still, I
prefer not to use compiler specific syntax if there's no need to.

-- 
Sakari Ailus
sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com