linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] remoteproc: fix argument 2 of rproc_mem_entry

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]

Message-ID: <20191109012105.GD5662@tuxbook-pro>
Date:   Fri, 8 Nov 2019 17:21:05 -0800
From:   Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
To:     "Ben Dooks (Codethink)" <ben.dooks@...ethink.co.uk>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...ts.codethink.co.uk,
        Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@...ery.com>,
        linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] remoteproc: fix argument 2 of rproc_mem_entry_init

On Thu 17 Oct 04:59 PDT 2019, Ben Dooks (Codethink) wrote:

> The rproc_mem_entry_init() call takes a pointer to a vm
> as the second argument. The code is currently using a
> plain 0 as "NULL". Change to using NULL to fix the
> following sparse warnings:
> 
> drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c:339:49: warning: Using plain integer as NULL pointer
> drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c:916:46: warning: Using plain integer as NULL pointer
> 

Applied, thanks

> Signed-off-by: Ben Dooks <ben.dooks@...ethink.co.uk>
> ---
> Cc: Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@...ery.com>
> Cc: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
> Cc: linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org
> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> ---
>  drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 5 +++--
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> index 3c5fbbbfb0f1..943af836fa0f 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> @@ -336,7 +336,8 @@ int rproc_alloc_vring(struct rproc_vdev *rvdev, int i)
>  			return -ENOMEM;
>  	} else {
>  		/* Register carveout in in list */
> -		mem = rproc_mem_entry_init(dev, 0, 0, size, rsc->vring[i].da,
> +		mem = rproc_mem_entry_init(dev, NULL, 0,
> +					   size, rsc->vring[i].da,
>  					   rproc_alloc_carveout,
>  					   rproc_release_carveout,
>  					   "vdev%dvring%d",
> @@ -913,7 +914,7 @@ static int rproc_handle_carveout(struct rproc *rproc,
>  	}
>  
>  	/* Register carveout in in list */
> -	carveout = rproc_mem_entry_init(dev, 0, 0, rsc->len, rsc->da,
> +	carveout = rproc_mem_entry_init(dev, NULL, 0, rsc->len, rsc->da,
>  					rproc_alloc_carveout,
>  					rproc_release_carveout, rsc->name);
>  	if (!carveout) {
> -- 
> 2.23.0
>