From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (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 A5FD41272C0; Wed, 14 Feb 2024 17:55:54 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1707933354; cv=none; b=CbPvI1Ms4WArayWhn4e9qulAih2adHbe8GlNf3QGd/ZqtAXqXmvCxzx9hP0XapT+N7AwkTjX7eyAuBmPTxkW1lyZT/Ghov4qzMfi+ufSXWAmon9QqSpZW4Oir9nkhHWtzQsejQ0LEWyVcwov/rMsqZtjoAz+bzmU+zhNd8bp3mY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1707933354; c=relaxed/simple; bh=AekKESNH1YzcWERD9WvAuc+h4Br5J7sxCXJp1H3DgIw=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=LmaG1qlw8P7SXOUVSaANJjJ7TjPqi8aXOPYyUDgh+vEfV7RHzOLis9Jx4V5Xe7UOWU+Brgk3IdUD2fck0Y7FPE5mKdb0akorvXRM5q4zdLj3f5a53F0jrUu0it/qtTWODBa6vbaYH+evs+Ku4koFa5Ky+C8qSsHt28DZ5CPpmEo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=hKuyTVQD; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="hKuyTVQD" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CF503C433C7; Wed, 14 Feb 2024 17:55:50 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1707933354; bh=AekKESNH1YzcWERD9WvAuc+h4Br5J7sxCXJp1H3DgIw=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=hKuyTVQDqnFOOiIzi24tJPQ1jaKR1kx1X+NHUv51k/lBi9dzWWY7AMgukTmxA/xIV aNU+95ZSw2gZx2SH+v+Kxtc4tAbkqpQ8/DbBwj4Y7Lz9dYyeDxyufOMtTJhxHqXYdq 4TIcd7sX5ZiFUNPeG3yV0JxRWhNtV/U3jMSSnUfzF7tLk5psc5Qf2uZEktBOjeZJGy VYaBibDRgvKyaHFO8itr9h28IGow/I+UfuFF/EnF1sINg9b8tp6VDV6+bMGY2eFXUK to9cGho1TZ84A1p+tJhsu1XO2aXsYs/08XblS+r01W1VDlZqM3j1lKvaazWvKrNjCb WtuOcfbL4Rj0A== From: Kalle Valo To: "Arnd Bergmann" Cc: "Arend van Spriel" , "Arnd Bergmann" , "Nathan Chancellor" , "Greg Kroah-Hartman" , "Pieter-Paul Giesberts" , "Nick Desaulniers" , "Bill Wendling" , "Justin Stitt" , "Artem Chernyshev" , "Jonas Gorski" , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, brcm80211@lists.linux.dev, brcm80211-dev-list.pdl@broadcom.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, llvm@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: [PATCH] brcmsmac: avoid function pointer casts References: <20240213100548.457854-1-arnd@kernel.org> <170790035300.3179441.9169506478575963188.kvalo@kernel.org> <3f1c2d5a-ba98-4ae5-a7a0-0328b7552113@app.fastmail.com> Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2024 19:55:48 +0200 In-Reply-To: <3f1c2d5a-ba98-4ae5-a7a0-0328b7552113@app.fastmail.com> (Arnd Bergmann's message of "Wed, 14 Feb 2024 16:07:00 +0100") Message-ID: <87frxvnd5n.fsf@kernel.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: llvm@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain "Arnd Bergmann" writes: > On Wed, Feb 14, 2024, at 10:23, Arend van Spriel wrote: > >> On 2/14/2024 9:45 AM, Kalle Valo wrote: >>> Arnd Bergmann wrote: >>> >>>> From: Arnd Bergmann >>>> >>>> An old cleanup went a little too far and causes a warning with clang-16 >>>> and higher as it breaks control flow integrity (KCFI) rules: >>>> >>>> drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmsmac/phy_shim.c:64:34: error: cast from 'void (*)(struct brcms_phy *)' to 'void (*)(void *)' converts to incompatible function type [-Werror,-Wcast-function-type-strict] >>>> 64 | brcms_init_timer(physhim->wl, (void (*)(void *))fn, >>>> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >>>> >>>> Change this one instance back to passing a void pointer so it can be >>>> used with the timer callback interface. >>>> >>>> Fixes: d89a4c80601d ("staging: brcm80211: removed void * from softmac phy") >>>> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann >>> >>> I guess this should go to wireless tree? >> >> This has been like this forever looking at the "staging" part in the >> Fixes tag. Is it really so urgent now? On the other hand I have no real >> problem with moving this to the wireless tree. Just wondering out loud. > > It's probably fine either way. Some maintainers like to backport > the warning fixes to stable kernels, others don't. Since the > warning is currently only enabled at W=1 level, it's probably fine > to fix it for linux-next only, but if we want the fix backported, > it should also go into 6.8. Thanks, let's take it wireless-next then. -- https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/ https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches