linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] staging: gpib: Modernize gpib_interface

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: <2025011054-amused-award-88f8@gregkh>
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2025 16:03:09 +0100
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Dave Penkler <dpenkler@...il.com>
Cc: linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] staging: gpib: Modernize gpib_interface_t
 initialization and make static

On Wed, Jan 08, 2025 at 06:41:21PM +0100, Dave Penkler wrote:
> All interface drivers were using the old style initialization of
> this struct
> 
> field : value;
> 
> This generated the followng sparse warning, for example:
> agilent_82357a/agilent_82357a.c:1492:1: warning: obsolete struct initializer, use C99 syntax
> 
> Change the initialization to use the C99 syntax
> 
> .field = value;
> 
> This also resolves the checkpatch constraint of no indentation.
> 
> These structs were also not declared as static, unnecessarily polluting
> the symbol namespace and generating the following sparse warnings,
> for example:
> 
> agilent_82357a/agilent_82357a.c:1465:18: warning: symbol 'agilent_82357a_gpib_interface' was not declared. Should it be static?
> 
> Declare them as static and remove any conflicting extern declarations
> in the corresponding include files.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dave Penkler <dpenkler@...il.com>
> ---
> v1 -> v2 Add subsystem prefix to subject

Please test-build your changes before sending them out :(

thanks,

greg k-h