[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201102102343.GK1551@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 10:23:43 +0000
From: Russell King - ARM Linux admin <linux@...linux.org.uk>
To: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Cc: daniel.vetter@...ll.ch, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
yepeilin.cs@...il.com, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] Fonts: font_acorn_8x8: Replace discarded const
qualifier
On Sun, Nov 01, 2020 at 01:11:22PM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Sat, 31 Oct 2020, Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 06:18:22PM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > Commit 09e5b3fd5672 ("Fonts: Support FONT_EXTRA_WORDS macros for
> >
> > Your commit ID does not exist in mainline kernels, which makes this
> > confusing. The commit ID you should be using is 6735b4632def.
>
> Ah yes, quite right. That is the ID from android-3.18 where this
> issue was first seen and fixed against. I will fix it up for
> Mainline.
>
> Does the fix look okay to you though Russell?
Frankly, I don't know. Looking at the commit itself, it looks safe,
but it depends what this "extra" data is being used for. From what
I can see, the commit in question just adds the additional opaque
data as a member named "extra", and one is left to guess what it's
use as.
I'd have thought a small structure with named members would have
been the minimum given our standards for in-kernel code.
Why was the "const" dropped in the first place? Does this "extra"
member get written to somewhere?
So, sorry, no idea. This looks to me like a very unsatisfactory
commit, and probably something that got a very poor review.
--
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTP is here! 40Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists