netdev - Re: [RFC v4 net-next 11/17] mfd: ocelot: prepend resource size macros to be 32-bit

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Y1+WQ2ebtoBw0AgB@google.com>
Date:   Mon, 31 Oct 2022 09:32:51 +0000
From:   Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>
To:     Colin Foster <colin.foster@...advantage.com>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com,
        Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
        Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@....com>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC v4 net-next 11/17] mfd: ocelot: prepend resource size
 macros to be 32-bit

On Sat, 08 Oct 2022, Colin Foster wrote:

> The *_RES_SIZE macros are initally <= 0x100. Future resource sizes will be
> upwards of 0x200000 in size.
> 
> To keep things clean, fully align the RES_SIZE macros to 32-bit to do
> nothing more than make the code more consistent.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Colin Foster <colin.foster@...advantage.com>
> ---
> 
> v3-v4
>     * No change
> 
> v2
>     * New patch - broken out from a different one
> 
> ---
>  drivers/mfd/ocelot-core.c | 8 ++++----
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

I'm guessing some of the other patches depend on this?

How should it be handled?

For my own reference (apply this as-is to your sign-off block):

  Acked-for-MFD-by: Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>

-- 
Lee Jones [李琼斯]