linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the reset tree

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: <64a9b0f21ec290cb9af5887e8ae46b90ce34edc2.camel@pengutronix.de>
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2025 09:22:13 +0100
From: Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>, Bartosz Golaszewski
	 <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Next
 Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the reset tree

On Fr, 2025-11-21 at 14:50 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> On Fri, 21 Nov 2025 11:15:34 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> > 
> > After merging the reset tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> > allmodconfig) failed like this:
> > 
> > drivers/platform/x86/intel/chtwc_int33fe.c:80:12: error: 'struct software_node_ref_args' has no member named 'node'; did you mean 'swnode'?
> >    80 |         { .node = NULL },
> >       |            ^~~~
> >       |            swnode
> > drivers/platform/x86/intel/chtwc_int33fe.c: In function 'cht_int33fe_remove_nodes':
> > drivers/platform/x86/intel/chtwc_int33fe.c:193:33: error: 'struct software_node_ref_args' has no member named 'node'; did you mean 'swnode'?
> >   193 |         if (fusb302_mux_refs[0].node) {
> >       |                                 ^~~~
> >       |                                 swnode
> > drivers/platform/x86/intel/chtwc_int33fe.c:194:76: error: 'struct software_node_ref_args' has no member named 'node'; did you mean 'swnode'?
> >   194 |                 fwnode_handle_put(software_node_fwnode(fusb302_mux_refs[0].node));
> >       |                                                                            ^~~~
> >       |                                                                            swnode
> > drivers/platform/x86/intel/chtwc_int33fe.c:195:37: error: 'struct software_node_ref_args' has no member named 'node'; did you mean 'swnode'?
> >   195 |                 fusb302_mux_refs[0].node = NULL;
> >       |                                     ^~~~
> >       |                                     swnode
> > drivers/platform/x86/intel/chtwc_int33fe.c: In function 'cht_int33fe_add_nodes':
> > drivers/platform/x86/intel/chtwc_int33fe.c:225:29: error: 'struct software_node_ref_args' has no member named 'node'; did you mean 'swnode'?
> >   225 |         fusb302_mux_refs[0].node = mux_ref_node;
> >       |                             ^~~~
> >       |                             swnode
> > 
> > Caused by commit
> > 
> >   d7cdbbc93c56 ("software node: allow referencing firmware nodes")
> > 
> > I have used the reset tree from next-20251120 for today.
> 
> This same commit is also in the gpio-brgl tree, so I have used that
> tree from next-20251120 as well.

Commit d7cdbbc93c56 ("software node: allow referencing firmware nodes")
renames the 'node' field in software_node_ref_args to 'swnode', so the
trivial build fix would be:

----------8<----------
diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/intel/chtwc_int33fe.c b/drivers/platform/x86/intel/chtwc_int33fe.c
index 29e8b5432f4c..96400dec0baf 100644
--- a/drivers/platform/x86/intel/chtwc_int33fe.c
+++ b/drivers/platform/x86/intel/chtwc_int33fe.c
@@ -77,7 +77,7 @@ static const struct software_node max17047_node = {
  * software node.
  */
 static struct software_node_ref_args fusb302_mux_refs[] = {
-       { .node = NULL },
+       { .swnode = NULL },
 };
 
 static const struct property_entry fusb302_properties[] = {
@@ -190,9 +190,9 @@ static void cht_int33fe_remove_nodes(struct cht_int33fe_data *data)
 {
        software_node_unregister_node_group(node_group);
 
-       if (fusb302_mux_refs[0].node) {
-               fwnode_handle_put(software_node_fwnode(fusb302_mux_refs[0].node));
-               fusb302_mux_refs[0].node = NULL;
+       if (fusb302_mux_refs[0].swnode) {
+               fwnode_handle_put(software_node_fwnode(fusb302_mux_refs[0].swnode));
+               fusb302_mux_refs[0].swnode = NULL;
        }
 
        if (data->dp) {
@@ -222,7 +222,7 @@ static int cht_int33fe_add_nodes(struct cht_int33fe_data *data)
         * rely on software_node_register_node_group() to use the original
         * instance of properties instead of copying them.
         */
-       fusb302_mux_refs[0].node = mux_ref_node;
+       fusb302_mux_refs[0].swnode = mux_ref_node;
 
        ret = software_node_register_node_group(node_group);
        if (ret)

---------->8----------

I assume it was expected that drivers don't modify contents of struct
software_node_ref_args directly, but rather assign them with
SOFTWARE_NODE_REFERENCE(), so maybe this is not the correct fix?

regards
Philipp