linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 1/8] clk: Zero init clk_init

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:   Tue, 17 Sep 2019 13:39:56 -0700
From:   Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
To:     Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>,
        mturquette@...libre.com, robh+dt@...nel.org
Cc:     linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        haitao.suo@...main.com, darren.tsao@...main.com,
        fisher.cheng@...main.com, alec.lin@...main.com,
        Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/8] clk: Zero init clk_init_data in helpers

Quoting Manivannan Sadhasivam (2019-09-16 09:14:40)
> The clk_init_data struct needs to be initialized to zero for the new
> parent_map implementation to work correctly. Otherwise, the member which
> is available first will get processed.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>
> ---
>  drivers/clk/clk-composite.c  | 2 +-
>  drivers/clk/clk-divider.c    | 2 +-
>  drivers/clk/clk-fixed-rate.c | 2 +-
>  drivers/clk/clk-gate.c       | 2 +-
>  drivers/clk/clk-mux.c        | 2 +-
>  5 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk-composite.c b/drivers/clk/clk-composite.c
> index b06038b8f658..4d579f9d20f6 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/clk-composite.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/clk-composite.c
> @@ -208,7 +208,7 @@ struct clk_hw *clk_hw_register_composite(struct device *dev, const char *name,
>                         unsigned long flags)
>  {
>         struct clk_hw *hw;
> -       struct clk_init_data init;
> +       struct clk_init_data init = { NULL };

I'd prefer { } because then we don't have to worry about ordering the
struct to have a pointer vs. something else first.

>         struct clk_composite *composite;
>         struct clk_ops *clk_composite_ops;
>         int ret;