From: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com>
To: Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>
Cc: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Jon Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@baylibre.com>,
Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
John Crispin <john@phrozen.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, <linux-mips@linux-mips.org>,
Sudip Mukherjee <sudip.mukherjee@codethink.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mips: lantiq: fix irq_chip name to not land in new parent field
Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 09:31:37 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160803133136.GJ29630@windriver.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160803055653.GG15910@linux-mips.org>
[Re: [PATCH] mips: lantiq: fix irq_chip name to not land in new parent field] On 03/08/2016 (Wed 07:56) Ralf Baechle wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 02:54:47PM -0400, Paul Gortmaker wrote:
>
> > As of commit be45beb2df69 ("genirq: Add runtime power management
> > support for IRQ chips") the irq_chip struct got a struct *device
> > parent_device field added to it. However, it was added at the
> > beginning of the struct, which previously was the "name" entry.
> >
> > The driver here was using a mix of ordered struct init entries and
> > named init entries. It was supplying the name assuming it was the 1st
> > in the order, and hence when that became a struct *device we get:
> >
> > arch/mips/lantiq/irq.c:209:2: warning: initialization from incompatible pointer type [enabled by default]
> > arch/mips/lantiq/irq.c:209:2: warning: (near initialization for 'ltq_irq_type.parent_device') [enabled by default]
> > arch/mips/lantiq/irq.c:219:2: warning: initialization from incompatible pointer type [enabled by default]
> > arch/mips/lantiq/irq.c:219:2: warning: (near initialization for 'ltq_eiu_type.parent_device') [enabled by default]
> >
> > While not runtime tested, I can't imagine trying to dereference a
> > a struct device field from a char string will end well.
> >
> > Here we've used named element init entries for the name string as well
> > to fix it.
> >
> > Fixes: be45beb2df69 ("genirq: Add runtime power management support for IRQ chips")
> > Cc: Jon Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com>
> > Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman@baylibre.com>
> > Cc: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
> > Cc: John Crispin <john@phrozen.org>
> > Cc: Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>
> > Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> > Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org
> > Signed-off-by: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com>
>
> Thanks for the patch but I've already applied the identical patch
> https://patchwork.linux-mips.org/patch/13684/.
Patchwork shows that patch was from June, however I still saw the issue
on the linux-next from yesterday (or maybe the weekend?). Is the
branch you applied it to being fed into sfr's daily merge queue?
P.
--
>
> Ralf
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com>
To: Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jon Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@baylibre.com>,
Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
John Crispin <john@phrozen.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
linux-mips@linux-mips.org,
Sudip Mukherjee <sudip.mukherjee@codethink.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mips: lantiq: fix irq_chip name to not land in new parent field
Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 09:31:37 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160803133136.GJ29630@windriver.com> (raw)
Message-ID: <20160803133137.6JF2-dMI0yGZaVA2Md_VWw7w26znbuuq-RTU6aIsbcg@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160803055653.GG15910@linux-mips.org>
[Re: [PATCH] mips: lantiq: fix irq_chip name to not land in new parent field] On 03/08/2016 (Wed 07:56) Ralf Baechle wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 02:54:47PM -0400, Paul Gortmaker wrote:
>
> > As of commit be45beb2df69 ("genirq: Add runtime power management
> > support for IRQ chips") the irq_chip struct got a struct *device
> > parent_device field added to it. However, it was added at the
> > beginning of the struct, which previously was the "name" entry.
> >
> > The driver here was using a mix of ordered struct init entries and
> > named init entries. It was supplying the name assuming it was the 1st
> > in the order, and hence when that became a struct *device we get:
> >
> > arch/mips/lantiq/irq.c:209:2: warning: initialization from incompatible pointer type [enabled by default]
> > arch/mips/lantiq/irq.c:209:2: warning: (near initialization for 'ltq_irq_type.parent_device') [enabled by default]
> > arch/mips/lantiq/irq.c:219:2: warning: initialization from incompatible pointer type [enabled by default]
> > arch/mips/lantiq/irq.c:219:2: warning: (near initialization for 'ltq_eiu_type.parent_device') [enabled by default]
> >
> > While not runtime tested, I can't imagine trying to dereference a
> > a struct device field from a char string will end well.
> >
> > Here we've used named element init entries for the name string as well
> > to fix it.
> >
> > Fixes: be45beb2df69 ("genirq: Add runtime power management support for IRQ chips")
> > Cc: Jon Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com>
> > Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman@baylibre.com>
> > Cc: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
> > Cc: John Crispin <john@phrozen.org>
> > Cc: Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>
> > Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> > Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org
> > Signed-off-by: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com>
>
> Thanks for the patch but I've already applied the identical patch
> https://patchwork.linux-mips.org/patch/13684/.
Patchwork shows that patch was from June, however I still saw the issue
on the linux-next from yesterday (or maybe the weekend?). Is the
branch you applied it to being fed into sfr's daily merge queue?
P.
--
>
> Ralf
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-03 13:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-08-02 18:54 [PATCH] mips: lantiq: fix irq_chip name to not land in new parent field Paul Gortmaker
2016-08-02 18:54 ` Paul Gortmaker
2016-08-03 5:56 ` Ralf Baechle
2016-08-03 13:31 ` Paul Gortmaker [this message]
2016-08-03 13:31 ` Paul Gortmaker
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160803133136.GJ29630@windriver.com \
--to=paul.gortmaker@windriver.com \
--cc=john@phrozen.org \
--cc=jonathanh@nvidia.com \
--cc=khilman@baylibre.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mips@linux-mips.org \
--cc=marc.zyngier@arm.com \
--cc=ralf@linux-mips.org \
--cc=sudip.mukherjee@codethink.co.uk \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.