From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out.smtpout.orange.fr (out-18.smtpout.orange.fr [193.252.22.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 021D222654E; Thu, 6 Feb 2025 11:05:54 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.252.22.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1738839958; cv=none; b=e0vUqUWQszlwy6vZdH21B1htS+EQO7k8oiSVZSmOmyqSmnkP2OQoIlqVfxQ9GeOK5RluOd6aP8u+alXjp7OcbVSH0t4YxS1GZxgFkw3++l8mGMP9TO15OEdLWIVebnXfvrqazUNM2i1bmHZN7Wd37+JX04oBIwgR6/ayHKAF0fQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1738839958; c=relaxed/simple; bh=NZsOj5Fcsv03IXvzItAxk4Olrw8rpbCtglB2caFfCIY=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=JZyhX5m6wNdpgsmcY4OYdNzJaI/fF/UBOMYeasdPHIfIpRIoeO/GYgUiBCP5S2/0ptGQ3OZFhY7vpGJniLnCDqY7c5jl79knp9a+Xm/WWhEBuy1bZuLmBDrzfYgChdNoF0ZYNedRg8epz0xk47nGemIJjU84uPimYF5KVA/2xlU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=wanadoo.fr; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=wanadoo.fr; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=wanadoo.fr header.i=@wanadoo.fr header.b=qNLgkufj; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.252.22.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=wanadoo.fr Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=wanadoo.fr Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=wanadoo.fr header.i=@wanadoo.fr header.b="qNLgkufj" Received: from [172.16.82.72] ([124.33.176.97]) by smtp.orange.fr with ESMTPA id fzhHthr0k30iWfzhMtk9fv; Thu, 06 Feb 2025 12:05:46 +0100 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=wanadoo.fr; s=t20230301; t=1738839947; bh=Yeb+V8hfoEsFwMLqNg9Wg1OhP0aaKTe+CyROomT+Lmk=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:From; b=qNLgkufjqmHggIua4wEQscAknB0Bb5SfXuOm7Bs/vYLRNWR8yO/VNUWP3SPRmM6gq 4wrfKATaLE8LMHmq3nq2TuHuMeWnMHXZ+t8JNx/SJJN+zm8uxJGCVYUpupgg7yAO5U F9vjBSpEfYK3B1jhEaUU2zBfFb13kT35rwh+8/dGfu1/INunadRiiKSdqdd2C56h0w PgIwBC7R9sDlKzXlzp3NF7JMxFrk388p7VUyy5uNhg/ggzHHu2RsQR5M+GxXngebNG 9DwlMWPW8EX826d75Nob3mFdfW8mC4u7atqjOB5+Y64DzxzxKc/iwNT0kIw82ZnrP/ h46fbam00CLhw== X-ME-Helo: [172.16.82.72] X-ME-Auth: bWFpbGhvbC52aW5jZW50QHdhbmFkb28uZnI= X-ME-Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2025 12:05:47 +0100 X-ME-IP: 124.33.176.97 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2025 20:05:26 +0900 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 4/7] can: Add Nuvoton NCT6694 CANFD support To: Ming Yu Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, linux-can@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org, linux-hwmon@vger.kernel.org, linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, tmyu0@nuvoton.com, lee@kernel.org, linus.walleij@linaro.org, brgl@bgdev.pl, andi.shyti@kernel.org, mkl@pengutronix.de, andrew+netdev@lunn.ch, davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, wim@linux-watchdog.org, linux@roeck-us.net, jdelvare@suse.com, alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com References: <20250123091115.2079802-1-a0282524688@gmail.com> <20250123091115.2079802-5-a0282524688@gmail.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Vincent Mailhol Autocrypt: addr=mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr; keydata= xjMEZluomRYJKwYBBAHaRw8BAQdAf+/PnQvy9LCWNSJLbhc+AOUsR2cNVonvxhDk/KcW7FvN LFZpbmNlbnQgTWFpbGhvbCA8bWFpbGhvbC52aW5jZW50QHdhbmFkb28uZnI+wrIEExYKAFoC GwMFCQp/CJcFCwkIBwICIgIGFQoJCAsCBBYCAwECHgcCF4AWIQTtj3AFdOZ/IOV06OKrX+uI bbuZwgUCZx41XhgYaGtwczovL2tleXMub3BlbnBncC5vcmcACgkQq1/riG27mcIYiwEAkgKK BJ+ANKwhTAAvL1XeApQ+2NNNEwFWzipVAGvTRigA+wUeyB3UQwZrwb7jsQuBXxhk3lL45HF5 8+y4bQCUCqYGzjgEZx4y8xIKKwYBBAGXVQEFAQEHQJrbYZzu0JG5w8gxE6EtQe6LmxKMqP6E yR33sA+BR9pLAwEIB8J+BBgWCgAmFiEE7Y9wBXTmfyDldOjiq1/riG27mcIFAmceMvMCGwwF CQPCZwAACgkQq1/riG27mcJU7QEA+LmpFhfQ1aij/L8VzsZwr/S44HCzcz5+jkxnVVQ5LZ4B ANOCpYEY+CYrld5XZvM8h2EntNnzxHHuhjfDOQ3MAkEK In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 04/02/2025 at 12:24, Ming Yu wrote: > Dear Vincent, > > Thank you for reviewing, > I will address the issues you mentioned in the next patch. > > Vincent Mailhol 於 2025年1月26日 週日 下午4:47寫道： >> > ... >>> +static int nct6694_can_get_clock(struct nct6694_can_priv *priv) >>> +{ >>> + struct nct6694_can_information *info; >>> + struct nct6694_cmd_header cmd_hd = { >> >> If the variable only has constant initializer, make it static const: >> >> static const struct nct6694_cmd_header cmd_hd = { >> >> Apply this at other locations in your different modules. >> >>> + .mod = NCT6694_CAN_MOD, >>> + .cmd = NCT6694_CAN_INFORMATION, >>> + .sel = NCT6694_CAN_INFORMATION_SEL, >>> + .len = cpu_to_le16(sizeof(*info)) >>> + }; >>> + int ret, can_clk; >>> + >>> + info = kzalloc(sizeof(*info), GFP_KERNEL); >>> + if (!info) >>> + return -ENOMEM; >>> + > > Excuse me, I would like to confirm, if the variable is constant > initializer, should the declaration be written as: > static const struct nct6694_cmd_header cmd_hd = { > .mod = NCT6694_CAN_MOD, > .cmd = NCT6694_CAN_INFORMATION, > .sel = NCT6694_CAN_INFORMATION_SEL, > .len = cpu_to_le16(sizeof(struct nct6694_can_information)) > }; > instead of: > static const struct nct6694_cmd_header cmd_hd = { > .mod = NCT6694_CAN_MOD, > .cmd = NCT6694_CAN_INFORMATION, > .sel = NCT6694_CAN_INFORMATION_SEL, > .len = cpu_to_le16(sizeof(*info)) > }; > , correct? The sizeof() keyword returns a integer constant expression even if applied on to a variable (unless that variable is a variable length array, but these are banned in the kernel anyway). This is because only the type of the variable matters, and that is known at compile time. So, cpu_to_le16(sizeof(*info)) should work fine. Or are you getting any error? > In addition, does this mean that the parameter in nct6694_read_msg() > and nct6694_write_msg() should be changed to const struct > nct6694_cmd_header *cmd_hd? Yes! Yours sincerely, Vincent Mailhol