linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] spi: spi-qpic-snand: remove 'qpic_snand

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: <174947644664.127013.16116071467167037102.b4-ty@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2025 14:40:46 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Gabor Juhos <j4g8y7@...il.com>
Cc: Md Sadre Alam <quic_mdalam@...cinc.com>, 
 Varadarajan Narayanan <quic_varada@...cinc.com>, 
 Sricharan Ramabadhran <quic_srichara@...cinc.com>, 
 linux-spi@...r.kernel.org, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, 
 linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] spi: spi-qpic-snand: remove 'qpic_snand_op' structure

On Thu, 29 May 2025 19:35:44 +0200, Gabor Juhos wrote:
> The 'qpic_snand_op' structure is used only in the qcom_spi_send_cmdaddr()
> function as a type of a local variable. Additionally, the sole purpose of
> that variable is to keep some interim values before those gets passed as
> arguments for cpu_to_le32() calls.
> 
> In order to simplify the code, remove the definition of the structure
> along with the local variable, and use the corresponding values directly
> as parameters for cpu_to_le32() calls.
> 
> [...]

Applied to

   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/spi.git for-next

Thanks!

[1/1] spi: spi-qpic-snand: remove 'qpic_snand_op' structure
      commit: f73dc37ebf45573349aee0aae168e8dc3d13ecee

All being well this means that it will be integrated into the linux-next
tree (usually sometime in the next 24 hours) and sent to Linus during
the next merge window (or sooner if it is a bug fix), however if
problems are discovered then the patch may be dropped or reverted.

You may get further e-mails resulting from automated or manual testing
and review of the tree, please engage with people reporting problems and
send followup patches addressing any issues that are reported if needed.

If any updates are required or you are submitting further changes they
should be sent as incremental updates against current git, existing
patches will not be replaced.

Please add any relevant lists and maintainers to the CCs when replying
to this mail.

Thanks,
Mark