linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] Immutable branch between MFD, Char and Crypto due for the v6.18 merge window

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: <20250917093823.GG3893363@google.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2025 10:38:23 +0100
From: Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>
To: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>
Cc: Qunqin Zhao <zhaoqunqin@...ngson.cn>, herbert@...dor.apana.org.au,
	jarkko@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	loongarch@...ts.linux.dev, davem@...emloft.net,
	linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, peterhuewe@....de, jgg@...pe.ca,
	linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, sgarzare@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Immutable branch between MFD, Char and Crypto due for
 the v6.18 merge window

On Tue, 16 Sep 2025, Nathan Chancellor wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 08:58:35AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > On Fri, 12 Sep 2025, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> > > > The following changes since commit 8f5ae30d69d7543eee0d70083daf4de8fe15d585:
> > > > 
> > > >   Linux 6.17-rc1 (2025-08-10 19:41:16 +0300)
> ...
> > > > Qunqin Zhao (4):
> > > ...
> > > >       tpm: Add a driver for Loongson TPM device
> > > 
> > > This one needs a fix up due to commit 07d8004d6fb9 ("tpm: add bufsiz
> > > parameter in the .send callback") in 6.17-rc1, as I am seeing the
> > > following error in next-20250912.
> > > 
> > >   drivers/char/tpm/tpm_loongson.c:48:17: error: initialization of 'int (*)(struct tpm_chip *, u8 *, size_t,  size_t)' {aka 'int (*)(struct tpm_chip *, unsigned char *, long unsigned int,  long unsigned int)'} from incompatible pointer type 'int (*)(struct tpm_chip *, u8 *, size_t)' {aka 'int (*)(struct tpm_chip *, unsigned char *, long unsigned int)'} [-Wincompatible-pointer-types]
> > >      48 |         .send = tpm_loongson_send,
> > >         |                 ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > >   drivers/char/tpm/tpm_loongson.c:48:17: note: (near initialization for 'tpm_loongson_ops.send')
> > >   drivers/char/tpm/tpm_loongson.c:31:12: note: 'tpm_loongson_send' declared here
> > >      31 | static int tpm_loongson_send(struct tpm_chip *chip, u8 *buf, size_t count)
> > >         |            ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > > 
> > > Can you squash it or do you want a separate patch?
> > > 
> > > Cheers,
> > > Nathan
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_loongson.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_loongson.c
> > > index a4ec23639911..9e50250763d1 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_loongson.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_loongson.c
> > > @@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ static int tpm_loongson_recv(struct tpm_chip *chip, u8 *buf, size_t count)
> > >  	return cmd_ret->data_len;
> > >  }
> > >  
> > > -static int tpm_loongson_send(struct tpm_chip *chip, u8 *buf, size_t count)
> > > +static int tpm_loongson_send(struct tpm_chip *chip, u8 *buf, size_t bufsiz, size_t count)
> > >  {
> > >  	struct loongson_se_engine *tpm_engine = dev_get_drvdata(&chip->dev);
> > >  	struct tpm_loongson_cmd *cmd = tpm_engine->command;
> > 
> > This will break my local branch.
> > 
> > Any chance of an immutable pull-request for:
> > 
> >   07d8004d6fb9 ("tpm: add bufsiz parameter in the .send callback")
> 
> I might be missing something but this commit is in Linux 6.17-rc1, which
> this tree is based on according to both 'git log' and the lead in to
> your pull request at the top, so your local branch is already broken.
> That error message was taken from the tip of your tree and the fix was
> tested against it as well.
> 
> "tpm: Add a driver for Loongson TPM device" was sent back in early July,
> so it was never updated for this conflict.

Ah, gotcha.  I thought you were saying that 07d8004d6fb9 ("tpm: add
bufsiz parameter in the .send callback") was applied somewhere else.  In
which case, I need to figure out why my build testing didn't catch it.

I'd be happy with a formal patch from you or I can create the patch and
add your {Reported,Suggested}-by.  How would you like to proceed?

-- 
Lee Jones [李琼斯]