linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 5/7] bus: stm32_sys_bus: add support for STM32MP15 and STM32MP13 system bus

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: <f3ace6f0-12fb-8e97-5115-5511b4ffb223@kernel.org>
Date:   Thu, 22 Dec 2022 16:19:08 +0100
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To:     Gatien CHEVALLIER <gatien.chevallier@...s.st.com>,
        alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        Oleksii_Moisieiev@...m.com, linus.walleij@...aro.org,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org
Cc:     linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        loic.pallardy@...com, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        mark.rutland@....com, arnd@...db.de
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 5/7] bus: stm32_sys_bus: add support for STM32MP15 and
 STM32MP13 system bus

On 22/12/2022 15:30, Gatien CHEVALLIER wrote:
>>
>>> +	if (IS_ERR(mmio))
>>> +		return PTR_ERR(mmio);
>>> +
>>> +	pdata->sys_bus_base = mmio;
>>> +
>>> +	mdata = (struct stm32_sys_bus_match_data *)of_device_get_match_data(&pdev->dev);
>>
>> Why do you need the cast?
> 
> I do not :) TBH, mdata is not useful at all. Changing to directly assign 
> to pdata->pconf, that is now const there is no reason to modify it.

mdata should be const and then no need for cast.

> 
>>
>>> +	if (!mdata)
>>
>> Can you explain the case when this can actually happen? If it can, you
>> have bug in ID table.
> 
> No I cannot as the driver is probed. It is only a sanity check, I can 
> remove it for V3. However the function can return NULL... Would you 
> prefer an explicit check on NULL or a simple removal?

I propose to drop it. This simply cannot happen.

> 
>>
>>> +		return -EINVAL;
>>> +

Best regards,
Krzysztof