From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jarkko Sakkinen Subject: Re: [PATCH] tpm: constify transmit data pointers Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2017 00:28:37 +0300 Message-ID: <20170908212837.yhtvgp6gmxspgiad@linux.intel.com> References: <20170907133130.2463746-1-arnd@arndb.de> <20170907200153.GA6350@obsidianresearch.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170907200153.GA6350@obsidianresearch.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Jason Gunthorpe Cc: Arnd Bergmann , Peter Huewe , Marcel Selhorst , Colin Ian King , tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net On Thu, Sep 07, 2017 at 02:01:53PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Thu, Sep 07, 2017 at 03:30:45PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > Making cmd_getticks 'const' introduced a couple of harmless warnings: > > > > drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c: In function 'probe_itpm': > > drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c:469:31: error: passing argument 2 of 'tpm_tis_send_data' discards 'const' qualifier from pointer target type [-Werror=discarded-qualifiers] > > rc = tpm_tis_send_data(chip, cmd_getticks, len); > > drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c:477:31: error: passing argument 2 of 'tpm_tis_send_data' discards 'const' qualifier from pointer target type [-Werror=discarded-qualifiers] > > rc = tpm_tis_send_data(chip, cmd_getticks, len); > > drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c:255:12: note: expected 'u8 * {aka unsigned char *}' but argument is of type 'const u8 * {aka const unsigned char *}' > > static int tpm_tis_send_data(struct tpm_chip *chip, u8 *buf, size_t len) > > > > This changes the related functions to all take 'const' pointers > > so that gcc can see this as being correct. I had to slightly > > modify the logic around tpm_tis_spi_transfer() for this to work > > without introducing ugly casts. > > > > Fixes: 5e35bd8e06b9 ("tpm_tis: make array cmd_getticks static const to shink object code size") > > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann > > Reviewed-by: Jason Gunthorpe > > Bit confused how the compile warnings introduced by the original patch > were missed?? Jarkko do you run compile tests and sparse before > sending pull requests? > > Cheers, > Jason Yes, I do. This has not been part of any pull request so I fail to understand why you bring them up? I did run compile tests but managed somehow miss the warning. Sorry about that but something like this has happened rarely. I can only blame ridiculous amount of multitasking in last couple of weeks. /Jarkko