linux-kernel - Re: nvkm_devinit_func.disable() to be made void

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: <Y8WJBc/tOyGDxe8b@ubun2204.myguest.virtualbox.org>
Date:   Mon, 16 Jan 2023 22:57:33 +0530
From:   Deepak R Varma <drv@...lo.com>
To:     Ben Skeggs <bskeggs@...hat.com>, Karol Herbst <kherbst@...hat.com>,
        Lyude Paul <lyude@...hat.com>,
        David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, nouveau@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Saurabh Singh Sengar <ssengar@...rosoft.com>,
        Praveen Kumar <kumarpraveen@...ux.microsoft.com>,
        Deepak R Varma <drv@...lo.com>
Subject: Re: nvkm_devinit_func.disable() to be made void

On Sat, Jan 14, 2023 at 08:10:43PM +0530, Deepak R Varma wrote:
> Hello,
> It appears that the callback function disable() of struct nvkm_devinit_func does
> not need return U64 and can be transformed to be a void. This will impact a few
> drivers that have currently implementation of this callback since those always
> return 0ULL. So,
> 
> Change from
> 	  8 struct nvkm_devinit_func {
> 		... ...
> 	15          u64  (*disable)(struct nvkm_devinit *);
> 	  1 };
> 
> Change to
> 	  8 struct nvkm_devinit_func {
> 		... ...
> 	15          void  (*disable)(struct nvkm_devinit *);
> 	  1 };
> 
> 
> I am unsure if this change will have any UAPI impact. Hence wanted to confirm
> with you if you think this transformation is useful. If yes, I will be happy to
> submit a patch for your consideration.

Hello,
May I request a response on my query? Shall I proceed with submitting a patch
proposal for consideration?

Thank you,
./drv

> 
> Please let me know.
> 
> Thank you,
> ./drv
> 
>