From: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To: Dan Carpenter <error27@gmail.com>,
Liam Girdwood <lrg@slimlogic.co.uk>,
Jaroslav Kysela <perex@perex.cz>, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>,
Joonyoung Shim <jy0922.shim@samsung.com>,
alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [rfc patch] wm8994: range checking issue
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 12:59:46 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100324125946.GA26453@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100324120107.GH21571@bicker>
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 03:01:07PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> Smatch complained about BUG_ON(reg > WM8994_MAX_REGISTER) because the
> actual number of elements in the array was WM8994_REG_CACHE_SIZE + 1.
> I changed the BUG_ON() to return -EINVAL.
Please don't introduce orthogonal changes like this in patches, it's bad
practice and increases the chances of your patch being nacked.
> I was confused why WM8994_REG_CACHE_SIZE was different from the actual
> size of ->reg_cache and I was concerned because some places used
> ARRAY_SIZE() to find the end of the array and other places used
> WM8994_REG_CACHE_SIZE. In my patch, I made them the same.
This is caused by confusion with the MAX_CACHED_REGISTER definition in
the header. Best to use that one consistently, I guess - I've got a
sneaking suspicion something has gone AWOL in the driver publication
process.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-03-24 12:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-24 12:01 [rfc patch] wm8994: range checking issue Dan Carpenter
2010-03-24 12:59 ` Mark Brown [this message]
2010-03-24 14:06 ` Dan Carpenter
2010-03-24 14:31 ` Mark Brown
2010-03-25 10:58 ` Dan Carpenter
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=20100324125946.GA26453@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main \
--to=broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
--cc=alsa-devel@alsa-project.org \
--cc=error27@gmail.com \
--cc=jy0922.shim@samsung.com \
--cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lrg@slimlogic.co.uk \
--cc=perex@perex.cz \
--cc=tiwai@suse.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox