linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] drm/bridge: fix stack usage warning on old gcc

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]

Message-ID: <cd7c03e3-baba-73fd-f432-5ccc640a6f44@ti.com>
Date:   Wed, 29 Apr 2020 11:13:26 +0300
From:   Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@...com>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
CC:     Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@...sung.com>,
        Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@...libre.com>,
        David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
        Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@...com>,
        Laurent Pinchart <Laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
        Jonas Karlman <jonas@...boo.se>,
        Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@...l.net>,
        Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...labora.com>,
        Sebastian Reichel <sebastian.reichel@...labora.com>,
        dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/bridge: fix stack usage warning on old gcc

On 29/04/2020 11:02, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 9:56 AM Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@...com> wrote:
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/tc358768.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/tc358768.c
>>> index 1b39e8d37834..6650fe4cfc20 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/tc358768.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/tc358768.c
>>> @@ -178,6 +178,8 @@ static int tc358768_clear_error(struct tc358768_priv *priv)
>>>
>>>    static void tc358768_write(struct tc358768_priv *priv, u32 reg, u32 val)
>>>    {
>>> +     /* work around https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81715 */
>>> +     int tmpval = val;
> 
>>
>> tc358768_write is not inline. What is the inline function here? Or is tc358768_write optimized to
>> inline by the compiler?
> 
> I missed the lack of an explicit inline tag when looking at the bug. gcc
> usually decides which functions to inline on its own, so there is little
> difference in practice. Let me know if I should clarify the changelog and
> resend it.

Ok. I think this is fine.

Reviewed-by: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@...com>

  Tomi

-- 
Texas Instruments Finland Oy, Porkkalankatu 22, 00180 Helsinki.
Y-tunnus/Business ID: 0615521-4. Kotipaikka/Domicile: Helsinki