linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 12/13] regulator: add pm8008 pmic regulator 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]

Date: Tue, 14 May 2024 20:34:56 +0530
From: "Satya Priya Kakitapalli (Temp)" <quic_skakitap@...cinc.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
CC: <johan@...nel.org>, <andersson@...nel.org>, <broonie@...nel.org>,
        <conor+dt@...nel.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        <johan+linaro@...nel.org>, <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
        <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, <lee@...nel.org>, <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        <linus.walleij@...aro.org>, <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <robh@...nel.org>, <swboyd@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/13] regulator: add pm8008 pmic regulator driver


On 5/14/2024 7:48 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 5:05 PM Satya Priya Kakitapalli
> <quic_skakitap@...cinc.com> wrote:
>>> On Thu, May 09, 2024 at 03:07:02PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>>> Wed, May 08, 2024 at 10:37:50PM +0000, Stephen Boyd kirjoitti:
>>>>> Quoting Johan Hovold (2024-05-06 08:08:29)
> ...
>
>>>>>> +               BUILD_BUG_ON((ARRAY_SIZE(pldo_ranges) != 1) ||
>>>>> This should be an && not || right?
>>>>>> +                               (ARRAY_SIZE(nldo_ranges) != 1));
>>>> In any case BUILD_BUG_ON() is not encouraged for such cases, it would be much
>>>> better to have a static_assert() near to one of those arrays.
>>> I think the reason it is placed here is that the above line reads:
>>>
>>>        rdesc->n_linear_ranges = 1;
>>>
>>> and that would need to change if anyone expands the arrays.
>> Correct. static_assert() cannot be used in the middle of code here, it can only be used at the declarations part which doesn't serve the purpose.
> I didn't get this. The ARRAY_SIZE():s are defined at compile time
> globally. How does this prevent from using static_assert()?


The reason we added it here is to make sure the nlod_ranges and 
pldo_ranges doesn't become larger, and we forget updating the 
n_linear_ranges. Adding static_assert here is not feasible so adding a 
BUILD_BUG_ON at this point makes sure the n_linear_ranges is proper.


>> So, BUILD_BUG_ON is the only way to go here.
> I don't think so.
>