[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <bc665c1d-f2a6-495a-bda8-012b2619f0c4@amd.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2026 15:08:35 -0600
From: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@....com>
To: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>,
Sultan Alsawaf <sultan@...neltoast.com>
Cc: Bin Du <Bin.Du@....com>, mchehab@...nel.org, hverkuil@...all.nl,
laurent.pinchart+renesas@...asonboard.com, bryan.odonoghue@...aro.org,
prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@...renesas.com, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, pratap.nirujogi@....com,
benjamin.chan@....com, king.li@....com, gjorgji.rosikopulos@....com,
Phil.Jawich@....com, Dominic.Antony@....com, richard.gong@....com,
anson.tsao@....com, Svetoslav Stoilov <Svetoslav.Stoilov@....com>,
Alexey Zagorodnikov <xglooom@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 4/7] media: platform: amd: isp4 subdev and firmware
loading handling added
>>
>> Unless the firmware API structs are all __packed in a future firmware update, I
>> think the memsets should remain.
>
> If you want to be certain of the size of the structs, use BUILD_BUG_ON().
>
static_assert is another option here too. I did something like that in
drivers/acpi/platform_profile.c to make sure that a structure got
updated from new members.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists