Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-131568-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1;
Feedback-ID: i56a14606:Fastmail
User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.11.0-alpha0-333-gbfea15422e-fm-20240327.001-gbfea1542
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <63909b0a-7d76-418d-a54c-1061bd3b6e11@app.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20240329134917.579c3557@endymion.delvare>
References: <20240326144741.3094687-1-arnd@kernel.org>
 <20240326145140.3257163-4-arnd@kernel.org>
 <20240329134917.579c3557@endymion.delvare>
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2024 16:07:55 +0200
From: "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@arndb.de>
To: "Jean Delvare" <jdelvare@suse.de>, "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, "Masahiro Yamada" <masahiroy@kernel.org>,
 "Nathan Chancellor" <nathan@kernel.org>,
 "Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@suse.de>, "Nicolas Schier" <nicolas@fjasle.eu>,
 "Nick Desaulniers" <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
 "Bill Wendling" <morbo@google.com>, "Justin Stitt" <justinstitt@google.com>,
 linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, llvm@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/12] firmware: dmi-id: add a release callback function
Content-Type: text/plain

On Fri, Mar 29, 2024, at 13:49, Jean Delvare wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Mar 2024 15:51:30 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>> 
>> dmi_class uses kfree() as the .release function, but that now causes
>> a warning with clang-16 as it violates control flow integrity (KCFI)
>> rules:
>> 
>> drivers/firmware/dmi-id.c:174:17: error: cast from 'void (*)(const void *)' to 'void (*)(struct device *)' converts to incompatible function type [-Werror,-Wcast-function-type-strict]
>>   174 |         .dev_release = (void(*)(struct device *)) kfree,
>> 
>> Add an explicit function to call kfree() instead.
>> 
>> Fixes: 4f5c791a850e ("DMI-based module autoloading")
>
> Not sure if this fixes tag is really warranted. As I understand it,
> your change only removes a warning but there was no actual bug, right?

As Nathan already commented, it's a real bug. I also add 'Fixes'
tags for false-positives just to document what introduced a
warning. The Fixes tag doesn't automatically mean something gets
backported, though the stable maintainers often end up backporting
warning fixes as well, and it helps identify which kernels
need it.

> Looks good to me, thanks for doing that.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare <jdelvare@suse.de>
>
> Will you get this upstream, or do you expect me to take it in my
> dmi/for-next branch?

It would help me if you can apply it to your tree directly.

     Arnd