linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8 06/11] gpio: regmap: Allow to allocate regmap-irq device

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <aCsvF_fE-0wuDoiK@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 19 May 2025 16:16:07 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...el.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 v8 06/11] gpio: regmap: Allow to allocate regmap-irq
 device

On Fri, May 09, 2025 at 11:14:40AM +0200, Mathieu Dubois-Briand wrote:
> GPIO controller often have support for IRQ: allow to easily allocate
> both gpio-regmap and regmap-irq in one operation.

...

> -		memcpy(d->prev_status_buf, d->status_buf, array_size(d->prev_status_buf));
> +		memcpy(d->prev_status_buf, d->status_buf,
> +		       array_size(d->chip->num_regs, sizeof(d->prev_status_buf[0])));

Shouldn't this be fixed in the previous patch which mistakenly used
array_size(x) with one argument?

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko