From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5A7763EDAC6 for ; Wed, 20 May 2026 14:41:00 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1779288061; cv=none; b=gVwNJRl51C80eCJNQWP07+6LTet3U1pVJwMpK2heEPTMjmcINfwXG28jDmL3L1ianziZx7RU8cZOsTLFJdNQgjGw9xg5b7mFXv2T1U6qwExoRkGsrc6JO0Qj+3iQlUv4X6BBvsnIGmbVbcE8JFVey7xAvf8MFeCiLBhFg/RmbTM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1779288061; c=relaxed/simple; bh=o94bj6Ks4NsrpTvF/CI60JZpg9pQPot9rosy5WPizGw=; h=From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Date: Message-Id; b=AH0fhI6EKawGl3XIKTIFRinD9HpqekL68I2/KKhWxuxcnpw3LBOpcNyrbW0AXzWNl6j3K8oWK1rT5OeB1dWQcdEFAb0V+/bZTYMVffu4EU9dtAILY2aF+oUndzGPAxgFP99zIHjZ5tvsCXj+yT/KrTA9NXw2RRqWVfl0/4pSwVw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=Ys+yadcY; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="Ys+yadcY" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C8B161F000E9; Wed, 20 May 2026 14:40:59 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1779288060; bh=wYZ1v4vkEbZwHquGAX9rCGZ5cVIdlsHmRJO3/4PXEK8=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=Ys+yadcYsV6AsMYrNSdyZnDAjtnIZURig8r3iQz35VlmSUk6CqlIRTHb48W3K7dQa PWzYPQWh6Byq+dGp3q/kh4piwgs+q8c/JyQu12uYjo87141AbevrP4gYE66/3yYgJJ JthDLAnpBzoFVDk1A+jZlgo3SqY8cuR9YaMB48vyqoKyIJx5czXBeogYU4nxeVOYiH +sqF3ze5kgJ42Qfl3VMJE8txLIM+HPxnsUtLlr1TJ/I9q/ihLuQfRhDwNjQIKIcw7a vzGKnUiVNjDPdgEsvS31W/8TEbvNp5q2mD3s6TJYsR3Yz3bNiM/yyAlp+ZaoerQ6Hr dacCvpneXwSyg== From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/8] soc: bcm2835: Use IS_REACHABLE for function declaration Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: "Gregor Herburger" Cc: robh@kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, conor+dt@kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20260520-rpi-otp-driver-v5-1-b26e5908eeac@linutronix.de> References: <20260520-rpi-otp-driver-v5-1-b26e5908eeac@linutronix.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Wed, 20 May 2026 14:40:59 +0000 Message-Id: <20260520144059.C8B161F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(= s) to consider: - [Medium] Misuse of IS_REACHABLE to hide Kconfig dependency mismatches, le= ading to silent runtime failures. -- commit dcaefe39201e65d292203c3c769d9af92e05fa3c Author: Gregor Herburger soc: bcm2835: Use IS_REACHABLE for function declaration This commit modifies the raspberrypi-firmware header to use IS_REACHABLE()= =20 instead of IS_ENABLED(). The goal is to simplify Kconfig dependencies for=20 drivers relying on RASPBERRYPI_FIRMWARE and avoid linker errors when=20 COMPILE_TEST is enabled. > diff --git a/include/soc/bcm2835/raspberrypi-firmware.h b/include/soc/bcm= 2835/raspberrypi-firmware.h > index e1f87fbfe5542..eb33838e0cd10 100644 > --- a/include/soc/bcm2835/raspberrypi-firmware.h > +++ b/include/soc/bcm2835/raspberrypi-firmware.h > @@ -174,7 +174,7 @@ struct rpi_firmware_clk_rate_request { > .id =3D cpu_to_le32(_id), \ > } > =20 > -#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RASPBERRYPI_FIRMWARE) > +#if IS_REACHABLE(CONFIG_RASPBERRYPI_FIRMWARE) [Severity: Medium] Does using IS_REACHABLE() here risk silent runtime failures? If a dependent driver is built-in (=3Dy) while RASPBERRYPI_FIRMWARE=3Dm=20 (which becomes possible when changing the Kconfig to just=20 depends on RASPBERRYPI_FIRMWARE || COMPILE_TEST), IS_REACHABLE() evaluates= =20 to false. Instead of Kbuild catching the dependency mismatch with a visible link erro= r,=20 the compiler will silently substitute dummy inline implementations for the= =20 firmware API calls. This allows the built-in driver to compile and link=20 successfully, but it will fail at runtime (e.g., rpi_firmware_get() returning NULL). Was the original Kconfig expression explicitly structured to catch this=20 built-in vs module dependency mismatch at configuration time rather than=20 hiding it at runtime? > int rpi_firmware_property(struct rpi_firmware *fw, > u32 tag, void *data, size_t len); --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260520-rpi-otp-dr= iver-v5-0-b26e5908eeac@linutronix.de?part=3D1