linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 05/11] regmap: irq: Add support for chips without separate IRQ status

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: <Z9v1Sd0nrUobA9Mc@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2025 13:00:25 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Mathieu Dubois-Briand <mathieu.dubois-briand@...tlin.com>
Cc: Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
	Kamel Bouhara <kamel.bouhara@...tlin.com>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>,
	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
	Uwe Kleine-König <ukleinek@...nel.org>,
	Michael Walle <mwalle@...nel.org>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
	Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-input@...r.kernel.org, linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org,
	Grégory Clement <gregory.clement@...tlin.com>,
	Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 05/11] regmap: irq: Add support for chips without
 separate IRQ status

On Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 09:45:28AM +0100, Mathieu Dubois-Briand wrote:
> On Tue Mar 18, 2025 at 5:39 PM CET, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 05:26:21PM +0100, Mathieu Dubois-Briand wrote:

...

> > >  			default:
> > >  				BUG();
> > > -				goto exit;
> > > +				return ret;
> >
> > Hmm... BUG() implies unreachable, perhaps just a precursor patch to drop this
> > goto completely?
> 
> Ok, I will add a separate patch to remove the goto.

I just browsed the code for the similar and there are handful that do this.
At least one commit (from 2011) refers to GCC 4.3.3 that complains, but our
minimum requirement AFAIR is 5.1 nowadays. In any case it's up to you. I am
totally fine if you leave this as is.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko