linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 2/4] pinctrl: qcom: Add SM4450 pinctrl driver

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: <e3817ea6-3cdc-418f-bbeb-ed93e7f537e3@quicinc.com>
Date:   Mon, 4 Dec 2023 08:04:38 -0800
From:   Jeff Johnson <quic_jjohnson@...cinc.com>
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
        Tengfei Fan <quic_tengfan@...cinc.com>, <andersson@...nel.org>,
        <agross@...nel.org>, <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
        <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
CC:     <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <kernel@...cinc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/4] pinctrl: qcom: Add SM4450 pinctrl driver

On 12/3/2023 11:56 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 04/12/2023 02:57, Tengfei Fan wrote:
>>
>>
>> 在 11/30/2023 7:57 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski 写道:
>>> On 30/11/2023 03:40, Tengfei Fan wrote:
>>>> Add pinctrl driver for TLMM block found in SM4450 SoC.
>>>>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Tengfei Fan <quic_tengfan@...cinc.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>   drivers/pinctrl/qcom/Kconfig.msm      |    8 +
>>>>   drivers/pinctrl/qcom/Makefile         |    1 +
>>>>   drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-sm4450.c | 1013 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>   3 files changed, 1022 insertions(+)
>>>>   create mode 100644 drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-sm4450.c
>>>>
>>>
>>> Hm, was this patch ever built?
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Krzysztof
>>>
>> This patch has been built before, I will check and compare if there are 
>> any errors and changes when I submitted this patch series.
>>
> 
> No, it wasn't built. I just tried - applied it and:
> 
> pinctrl-sm4450.c:996:19: error: initialization of ‘int (*)(struct
> platform_device *)’ from incompatible pointer type ‘void (*)(struct
> platform_device *)’ [-Werror=incompatible-pointer-types]
>   996 |         .remove = msm_pinctrl_remove,
>       |                   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> ../drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-sm4450.c:996:19: note: (near
> initialization for ‘sm4450_tlmm_driver.remove’)
> 
> So you just sent a patch which was not even compiled.
> 
> NAK.
> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
> 

The problem here is patch 2/4 incorrectly initializes .remove and patch
3/4 changes it to correctly use .remove_new. Bisection at patch 2
doesn't build.

Those two patches should be squashed