linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] iwlwifi: work around -Wenum-compare-conditional warning

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <87zfmx3ocf.fsf@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2024 10:30:08 +0300
From: Kalle Valo <kvalo@...nel.org>
To: "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...nel.org>,  "Miri Korenblit"
 <miriam.rachel.korenblit@...el.com>,  "Johannes Berg"
 <johannes.berg@...el.com>,  "Emmanuel Grumbach"
 <emmanuel.grumbach@...el.com>,  "Gregory Greenman"
 <gregory.greenman@...el.com>,  "Daniel Gabay" <daniel.gabay@...el.com>,
  "Benjamin Berg" <benjamin.berg@...el.com>,  "Ilan Peer"
 <ilan.peer@...el.com>,  linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
  linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iwlwifi: work around -Wenum-compare-conditional warning

"Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...db.de> writes:

> On Fri, Oct 18, 2024, at 16:06, Kalle Valo wrote:
>> Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org> writes:
>>
>>> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
>>>
>>> This is one of only three -Wenum-compare-conditional warnings we get
>>> in randconfig builds:
>>>
>>> drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/mvm/sta.c:4331:17: error: conditional expression between different enumeration types ('enum iwl_fw_sta_type' and 'enum iwl_sta_type') [-Werror,-Wenum-compare-conditional]
>>>  4331 |         u32 type = mld ? STATION_TYPE_PEER : IWL_STA_LINK;
>>>       |                        ^ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~   ~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>>
>>> This is a false positive since the code works as intended, but the
>>> warning is otherwise sensible, so slightly rewrite it in order to
>>> not trigger the warning.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
>>
>> Is this and the other rtw89 patch for current release or -next?
>
> Up to you, the warning has existed for a long time at W=1
> level, so the patch applies to current and stable kernels
> as well, but it's not a regression or particularly important.

Ok, I guess -next is more approriate then.

> It would be nice to turn on the warning by default in 6.13
> once the three patches I sent get applied.

It's not certain if driver specific trees make it to v6.13 so should the
patches applied directly to wireless-next?

-- 
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/

https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches