linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] clk: imx93: Move IMX93_CLK

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: <ZrHgpuvoXqsoqTJj@pengfei-OptiPlex-Tower-Plus-7010>
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2024 16:36:54 +0800
From: Pengfei Li <pengfei.li_1@....com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
Cc: krzk+dt@...nel.org, robh@...nel.org, abelvesa@...nel.org,
	mturquette@...libre.com, sboyd@...nel.org, conor+dt@...nel.org,
	shawnguo@...nel.org, s.hauer@...gutronix.de, ping.bai@....com,
	ye.li@....com, peng.fan@....com, aisheng.dong@....com,
	frank.li@....com, kernel@...gutronix.de, festevam@...il.com,
	linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, imx@...ts.linux.dev,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] clk: imx93: Move IMX93_CLK_END macro to clk driver

On Sat, Jul 20, 2024 at 08:28:14PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 19/07/2024 08:08, Pengfei Li wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 29, 2024 at 10:49:49AM +0800, Pengfei Li wrote:
> >> On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 09:38:54AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >>> On 27/06/2024 10:24, Pengfei Li wrote:
> >>>> IMX93_CLK_END was previously defined in imx93-clock.h to indicate
> >>>> the number of clocks, but it is not part of the ABI, so it should
> >>>> be moved to clk driver.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Pengfei Li <pengfei.li_1@....com>
> >>>> ---
> >>>>
> >>>> Notes:
> >>>>     Change for v2:
> >>>>     - Use pre-processor define to simplify code.
> >>>>
> >>>>  drivers/clk/imx/clk-imx93.c | 2 ++
> >>>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> >>>
> >>> Are you sure this builds fine? If you need to define it here, it means
> >>> some part of that unit file already uses the define. If so, you include
> >>> the header. If you include the header, you should see fat warning.
> >>>
> >>> Really, people, just build your patches...
> >>>
> >>> Best regards,
> >>> Krzysztof
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> Hi Krzysztof,
> >>
> >> Yes, you're right, this macro definition has indeed been used. But
> >> this clk-imx93.c driver file is the only place where this macro is
> >> used. So maybe it would be more appropriate to define this macro in
> >> C rather than in the header file. Meanwhile, I also built my patch,
> >> but no warnings were found.
> >>
> >> BR,
> >> Pengfei Li
> >>
> > 
> > Hi Krzysztof,
> > 
> > I've built my patches, but no warnings were found. This C file is the only place where this macro definition is used, so why would I see fat warning?
> 
> I could be wrong, I really thought there should be a warning of
> duplicated define. But if there is none, sure, sounds good.
> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
> 
> 

Hi Krzysztof,

If this patchset is ok, could you help merge it? Otherwise I won't be able to send subsequent patches.

BR,
Pengfei