linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v6 4/4] drm/bridge: panel: Drop CONFIG_OF conditional around *_of_get

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: <OS0PR01MB592262D3EDAF424252157D5B86E5A@OS0PR01MB5922.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Thu, 31 Aug 2023 10:47:24 +0000
From:   Biju Das <biju.das.jz@...renesas.com>
To:     Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
CC:     Andrzej Hajda <andrzej.hajda@...el.com>,
        Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>,
        Robert Foss <rfoss@...nel.org>,
        David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
        Jonas Karlman <jonas@...boo.se>,
        Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@...il.com>,
        "dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org" <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v6 4/4] drm/bridge: panel: Drop CONFIG_OF conditional
 around  *_of_get_bridge()

Hi Laurent Pinchart,

> Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 4/4] drm/bridge: panel: Drop CONFIG_OF conditional
> around *_of_get_bridge()
> 
> On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 09:09:38AM +0100, Biju Das wrote:
> > Drop unnecessary CONFIG_OF conditional around devm_drm_of_get_bridge()
> > and
> > drmm_of_get_bridge() as it is guarded with #if..#else blocks in
> > drm_bridge.h.
> 
> This will increase the kernel size on non-OF system, to add functions that
> are not used. I don't think the #ifdef here is problematic.

OK agreed. I guess for NON-OF system it will give build error
for function redefinition, if that is the case I would like to
drop this patch.

static inline struct drm_bridge *devm_drm_of_get_bridge()

vs

struct drm_bridge *devm_drm_of_get_bridge()


Cheers,
Biju

> 
> > Signed-off-by: Biju Das <biju.das.jz@...renesas.com>
> > ---
> > v6:
> >  * New patch.
> > ---
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/panel.c | 3 ---
> >  1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/panel.c
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/panel.c index 7f41525f7a6e..9220a1c23697
> > 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/panel.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/panel.c
> > @@ -482,7 +482,6 @@ struct drm_connector
> > *drm_panel_bridge_connector(struct drm_bridge *bridge)  }
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL(drm_panel_bridge_connector);
> >
> > -#ifdef CONFIG_OF
> >  /**
> >   * devm_drm_of_get_bridge - Return next bridge in the chain
> >   * @dev: device to tie the bridge lifetime to @@ -550,5 +549,3 @@
> > struct drm_bridge *drmm_of_get_bridge(struct drm_device *drm,
> >  	return bridge;
> >  }
> >  EXPORT_SYMBOL(drmm_of_get_bridge);
> > -
> > -#endif
> 
> --
> Regards,
> 
> Laurent Pinchart