linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] cpufreq: arm_scmi: Constify scmi_perf

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: <20200907104418.GC17330@bogus>
Date:   Mon, 7 Sep 2020 11:44:18 +0100
From:   Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To:     Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Cc:     Rikard Falkeborn <rikard.falkeborn@...il.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] cpufreq: arm_scmi: Constify scmi_perf_ops pointers

On Mon, Sep 07, 2020 at 03:55:51PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 07-09-20, 11:22, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> > Hi Viresh,
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 07, 2020 at 01:04:50AM +0200, Rikard Falkeborn wrote:
> > > The perf_ops are not modified through this pointer. Make them const to
> > > indicate that. This is in preparation to make the scmi-ops pointers in
> > > scmi_handle const.
> > >
> >
> > Your ack needed to take this as series via {arm-,}soc
>
> Can I just pick the first patch and you do the rest ? Will it result
> in any warnings at either end ?
>

Initially I thought out suggesting the same, but then I realised(not
checked though), without this change in arm-soc the scmi-cpufreq driver
might produce warnings as the const value gets assigned to non const.
No ?

--
Regards,
Sudeep