Re: [BACKPORT 4.4.y 01/25] mmc: pwrseq: constify mmc_pwrseq_ops structures

From: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	stable@vger.kernel.org, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>,
	Janusz Krzysztofik <jmkrzyszt@gmail.com>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
	"Tobin C. Harding" <me@tobin.cc>,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>,
	linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [BACKPORT 4.4.y 01/25] mmc: pwrseq: constify mmc_pwrseq_ops structures
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2019 07:44:41 +0100 (CET)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1903260744290.2463@hadrien> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190326010831.GA29420@kroah.com>

On Tue, 26 Mar 2019, Greg KH wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 04:43:52PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > From: Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@lip6.fr>
> >
> > The mmc_pwrseq_ops structures are never modified, so declare them as const.
> >
> > Done with the help of Coccinelle.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@lip6.fr>
> > Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>
> > (cherry picked from commit ffedbd2210f2f4cba490a9205adc11fd1b89a852)
> > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> > ---
> >  drivers/mmc/core/pwrseq.h        | 2 +-
> >  drivers/mmc/core/pwrseq_emmc.c   | 2 +-
> >  drivers/mmc/core/pwrseq_simple.c | 2 +-
> >  3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/pwrseq.h b/drivers/mmc/core/pwrseq.h
> > index 096da48c6a7e..133de0426687 100644
> > --- a/drivers/mmc/core/pwrseq.h
> > +++ b/drivers/mmc/core/pwrseq.h
> > @@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ struct mmc_pwrseq_ops {
> >  };
> >
> >  struct mmc_pwrseq {
> > -	struct mmc_pwrseq_ops *ops;
> > +	const struct mmc_pwrseq_ops *ops;
> >  };
> >
> >  #ifdef CONFIG_OF
> > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/pwrseq_emmc.c b/drivers/mmc/core/pwrseq_emmc.c
> > index ad4f94ec7e8d..4a82bc77fe49 100644
> > --- a/drivers/mmc/core/pwrseq_emmc.c
> > +++ b/drivers/mmc/core/pwrseq_emmc.c
> > @@ -51,7 +51,7 @@ static void mmc_pwrseq_emmc_free(struct mmc_host *host)
> >  	kfree(pwrseq);
> >  }
> >
> > -static struct mmc_pwrseq_ops mmc_pwrseq_emmc_ops = {
> > +static const struct mmc_pwrseq_ops mmc_pwrseq_emmc_ops = {
> >  	.post_power_on = mmc_pwrseq_emmc_reset,
> >  	.free = mmc_pwrseq_emmc_free,
> >  };
> > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/pwrseq_simple.c b/drivers/mmc/core/pwrseq_simple.c
> > index d10538bb5e07..2b16263458af 100644
> > --- a/drivers/mmc/core/pwrseq_simple.c
> > +++ b/drivers/mmc/core/pwrseq_simple.c
> > @@ -87,7 +87,7 @@ static void mmc_pwrseq_simple_free(struct mmc_host *host)
> >  	kfree(pwrseq);
> >  }
> >
> > -static struct mmc_pwrseq_ops mmc_pwrseq_simple_ops = {
> > +static const struct mmc_pwrseq_ops mmc_pwrseq_simple_ops = {
> >  	.pre_power_on = mmc_pwrseq_simple_pre_power_on,
> >  	.post_power_on = mmc_pwrseq_simple_post_power_on,
> >  	.power_off = mmc_pwrseq_simple_power_off,
>
> Why is this needed for a stable patch?  It doesn't fix a bug, it just
> looks like it is a "nice thing" to have, right?  I don't think any later
> patch in this series relies it it, or am I missing something?

Fine with me.

julia