Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 4 Aug 2023 19:02:46 +0300 | From | Dan Carpenter <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v7 5/7] nvmem: core: Rework layouts to become platform devices |
| |
On Fri, Aug 04, 2023 at 05:39:03PM +0200, Miquel Raynal wrote: > Hi Dan, > > dan.carpenter@linaro.org wrote on Thu, 3 Aug 2023 13:13:04 +0300: > > > Hi Miquel, > > > > kernel test robot noticed the following build warnings: > > > > https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch#_base_tree_information] > > > > url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Miquel-Raynal/nvmem-core-Create-all-cells-before-adding-the-nvmem-device/20230802-022331 > > base: char-misc/char-misc-testing > > patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230801182132.1058707-6-miquel.raynal%40bootlin.com > > patch subject: [PATCH v7 5/7] nvmem: core: Rework layouts to become platform devices > > config: x86_64-randconfig-m001-20230730 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20230803/202308030002.DnSFOrMB-lkp@intel.com/config) > > compiler: gcc-12 (Debian 12.2.0-14) 12.2.0 > > reproduce: (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20230803/202308030002.DnSFOrMB-lkp@intel.com/reproduce) > > > > If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit > > (i.e. not just a new version of the same patch/commit), > > (Nice addition, a lot of newcomers would always add these tags > otherwise.)
The Intel kbuild devs add this stuff, I just look it over and hit forward.
> > > kindly add following tags > > | Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> > > | Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@linaro.org> > > | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/r/202308030002.DnSFOrMB-lkp@intel.com/ > > > > New smatch warnings: > > drivers/nvmem/core.c:1003 nvmem_register() warn: 'layout_np' is an error pointer or valid > > drivers/nvmem/core.c:2130 nvmem_try_loading_layout_driver() warn: 'layout_np' is an error pointer or valid > > > > Old smatch warnings: > > drivers/nvmem/core.c:761 nvmem_add_cells_from_fixed_layout() warn: 'layout_np' is an error pointer or valid > > drivers/nvmem/core.c:802 nvmem_layout_get() warn: 'layout_np' is an error pointer or valid > > > > vim +/layout_np +1003 drivers/nvmem/core.c > > > > 266570f496b90d Michael Walle 2023-04-04 1000 > > 00d059fd6702f0 Miquel Raynal 2023-08-01 1001 /* Populate layouts as devices */ > > 00d059fd6702f0 Miquel Raynal 2023-08-01 1002 layout_np = of_nvmem_layout_get_container(nvmem); > > 00d059fd6702f0 Miquel Raynal 2023-08-01 @1003 if (layout_np) { > > > > So, ugh, of_nvmem_layout_get_container() return NULL on error or error > > pointer if either CONFIG_NVMEM or CONFIG_OF is turned off. I feel like > > that's a mistake. Normally when a function returns both error pointers > > and NULL then the NULL means the feature is disabled and the error > > pointers mean there was an error. Here it is the opposite. > > > > I have written a blog about this: > > https://staticthinking.wordpress.com/2022/08/01/mixing-error-pointers-and-null/ > > Nice (besides the huge spider which stared at me unexpectedly :-) )
Those are a species of jumping spiders. They are shiny and golden in real life, but it never shows up properly in photos. :)
> > > At first I thought that this was to do with CONFIG_COMPILE_TEST but > > actually that is disabled. The issue here is that CONFIG_OF is turned > > off. So this is a genuine bug, we're compiling a module which will > > always crash. > > > > So I guess the fix is easy that this should return NULL if either > > CONFIG_NVMEM or CONFIG_OF is turned off. That was a long explanation > > which is no longer required now that it's not a COMPILE_TEST issue. :P > > I wanted to disable CONFIG_OF to make the test, I totally forget, I'll > handle this case and return NULL when this happens. > > However I don't understand why you mention CONFIG_NVMEM, because if it > is not defined, this file will not compile at all?
Yeah. You're right. I wrote this email thinking it was a CONFIG_COMPILE_TEST issue and didn't edit it properly in the end.
regards, dan carpenter
| |