Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-4160-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.199.223 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.199.223;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20231218090454.1.I5c6eb80b2f746439c4b58efab788e00701d08759@changeid>
In-Reply-To: <20231218090454.1.I5c6eb80b2f746439c4b58efab788e00701d08759@changeid>
From: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2023 09:24:46 -0800
Message-ID: <CAD=FV=Xpp16ptOuQz=5UYfgm8B-WbNXF95YwA1t-FTkzOYRE_A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/bridge: ps8640: Fix size mismatch warning w/ len
To: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Guenter Roeck <groeck@chromium.org>, Andrzej Hajda <andrzej.hajda@intel.com>, 
	Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>, David Airlie <airlied@gmail.com>, 
	Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@gmail.com>, Jonas Karlman <jonas@kwiboo.se>, 
	Laurent Pinchart <Laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>, 
	Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>, Maxime Ripard <mripard@kernel.org>, 
	Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@linaro.org>, Robert Foss <rfoss@kernel.org>, 
	Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>, Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi,

On Mon, Dec 18, 2023 at 9:05=E2=80=AFAM Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium=
.org> wrote:
>
> After commit 26195af57798 ("drm/bridge: ps8640: Drop the ability of
> ps8640 to fetch the EDID"), I got an error compiling:
>
>   error: comparison of distinct pointer types
>   ('typeof (len) *' (aka 'unsigned int *') and
>    'typeof (msg->size) *' (aka 'unsigned long *'))
>   [-Werror,-Wcompare-distinct-pointer-types]
>
> Fix it by declaring the `len` as size_t.
>
> Fixes: 26195af57798 ("drm/bridge: ps8640: Drop the ability of ps8640 to f=
etch the EDID")
> Signed-off-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
> ---
> Sorry for sending this hot on the heels of the other patch, but for
> some reason that other patch compiled fine for me until I picked it
> back to my downstream tree. I'll see if I can track down why. In any
> case, as soon as I see a Reviewed-by tag I'll land this.

Ah, I found it! <Phew> this makes me less worried that I had some
failure in my testing. I believe that upstream things weren't a
problem because of commit d03eba99f5bf ("minmax: allow
min()/max()/clamp() if the arguments have the same signedness.").
...so at least what's landed isn't actually broken upstream, just
downstream. It still feels reasonable to change this to "size_t",
though.

-Doug