[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Z-MrfICsY06DZV-2@shikoro>
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2025 23:17:32 +0100
From: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>
To: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Cc: syzbot <syzbot+c38e5e60d0041a99dbf5@...kaller.appspotmail.com>,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] media: dvb: usb: Fix WARNING in
dib0700_i2c_xfer/usb_submit_urb
On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 05:47:53PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 08:56:57PM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> >
> > > + static const struct i2c_adapter_quirks i2c_usb_quirks = {
> > > + .flags = I2C_AQ_NO_ZERO_LEN_READ,
> > > + };
> >
> > Why didn't you create the static struct outside of probe?
>
> Because it's used only in that one function. But if you prefer, I will
> move the definition outside of the function. It doesn't make any real
> difference.
Then, for consistency reasons, I'd really prefer it outside probe. I
also think it doesn't really make a difference, it just looks unusual to
me.
Thanks and happy hacking!
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists