[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <2ac20c84-2544-408f-a29a-8ae88ef3969c@app.fastmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2025 16:00:22 +0100
From: "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...db.de>
To: "Brigham Campbell" <me@...ghamcampbell.com>,
"Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...nel.org>, "Linus Walleij" <linusw@...nel.org>,
"Neil Armstrong" <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>,
"Maarten Lankhorst" <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
"Maxime Ripard" <mripard@...nel.org>,
"Thomas Zimmermann" <tzimmermann@...e.de>, "Dave Airlie" <airlied@...il.com>,
"Simona Vetter" <simona@...ll.ch>, "Doug Anderson" <dianders@...omium.org>
Cc: "Jessica Zhang" <jesszhan0024@...il.com>,
"Anusha Srivatsa" <asrivats@...hat.com>, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/panel: novatek-nt35560: avoid on-stack device structure
On Wed, Dec 10, 2025, at 05:54, Brigham Campbell wrote:
> On Thu Dec 4, 2025 at 2:45 AM MST, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> Change this to a pointer as was liley intended here.
>
> Shoot, you're absolutely right that I didn't mean to create a copy of
> the struct on the stack when I wrote that code. Thanks for the fix! I'll
> try to be more careful with struct usage and the stack in the future.
>
> Can I ask how you got the build process to emit those warnings? I didn't
> see it when I developed my patch.
I'm doing randconfig tests to check a large number of possible configurations.
I also have the CONFIG_FRAME_WARN logic replaced with lower configuration
specific default to catch more regressions in this particular area.
Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists