Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Mon, 24 Feb 2020 11:08:42 +0300
From:   Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
To:     Scott Branden <scott.branden@broadcom.com>
Cc:     Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        David Brown <david.brown@linaro.org>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>, bjorn.andersson@linaro.org,
        Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
        BCM Kernel Feedback <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com>,
        Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
        Andy Gross <agross@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/7] test_firmware: add partial read support for
 request_firmware_into_buf
Message-ID: <20200224080842.GA3308@kadam>
References: <20200220004825.23372-1-scott.branden@broadcom.com>
 <20200220004825.23372-4-scott.branden@broadcom.com>
 <20200220084255.GW7838@kadam>
 <9afab7f8-1b5f-a7bb-6b76-f7b19efb2979@broadcom.com>
 <4a666590-461d-17f9-5580-31a41869383f@broadcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <4a666590-461d-17f9-5580-31a41869383f@broadcom.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 05:13:08PM -0800, Scott Branden wrote:
> > > > +static ssize_t test_dev_config_show_size_t(char *buf, int cfg)
> > > > +{
> > > > +??? size_t val;
> > > > +
> > > > +??? mutex_lock(&test_fw_mutex);
> > > > +??? val = cfg;
> > > > +??? mutex_unlock(&test_fw_mutex);
> > > Both val and cfg are stack variables so there is no need for locking.
> > > Probably you meant to pass a pointer to cfg?
> I am following the existing code as was done for
> test_dev_config_show_bool(),
> test_dev_config_show_int(),
> test_dev_config_show_u8()

Heh.  Yes.  Those are buggy as well.  Good eyes.  Could you send a patch
to fix them?

regards,
dan caprnter