[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d93061b0-8cdf-a427-dc93-707af6282886@linux.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2024 17:19:30 +0200 (EET)
From: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@....com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@....com>,
Suma Hegde <suma.hegde@....com>,
Naveen Krishna Chatradhi <naveenkrishna.chatradhi@....com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] platform/x86/amd/hsmp: fix compile-testing without
CONFiG_AMD_NB
On Tue, 29 Oct 2024, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 29, 2024 at 02:39:41PM +0200, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
> > I don't like this very wording because what the code very much does is
> > NULL check on node_to_amd_nb() which leads to immediate failure of
> > .probe(). (We don't call other deferences after a NULL check "NULL pointer
> > dereference" either so none is introduced by this patch, IMO.)
>
> I was wondering that too: where does this line
>
> sock->root = node_to_amd_nb(i)->root;
>
> quoted by gcc come from?
>
> IOW, what is the correct Fixes: tag?
>
> The commit 7d3135d16356 ("platform/x86/amd/hsmp: Create separate ACPI, plat and common drivers
>
> is only in next AFAICT, so I'll drop the Fixes: tag when sending...
To clarify,
The assignment line is old (from 287a821c76be8 or even before that in
some form which would have not lead to compiler warning though).
It's the COMPILE_TEST that got enabled in 7d3135d16356, before that hsmp
depended on AMD_NB so the condition could never trigger.
--
i.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists