linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] spi: gpio: Make num_chipselect 8-bit in the struct spi_gpio_platform

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: <ZmDUBHUyy1uozcn2@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2024 00:09:24 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-spi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] spi: gpio: Make num_chipselect 8-bit in the
 struct spi_gpio_platform_data

On Mon, May 20, 2024 at 12:28:12PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 10:55:55PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 10:42:03PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > There is no use for whole 16-bit for the number of chip select pins.
> > > Drop it to 8 bits.
> > 
> > because...?
> 
> To make the type stricter, but since there is no other benefits and
> this one likely won't help to catch the (incorrect) use of big numbers
> I think we don't need it.
> 
> > It's the only field in the struct so it's not like it makes
> > any meaningful different to struct layout.

Should I do something about the first two patches or is it fine to get them in?

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko