From: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzk@kernel.org
GPIOs - as returned by of_get_named_gpio() and used by the gpiolib - are signed integers, where negative number indicates error. The return value of of_get_named_gpio() should not be assigned to an unsigned int because in case of !CONFIG_GPIOLIB such number would be a valid GPIO.
Fixes: c04c674fadeb ("nfc: s3fwrn5: Add driver for Samsung S3FWRN5 NFC Chip") Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzk@kernel.org --- drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/i2c.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/i2c.c b/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/i2c.c index 0ffa389..ae26594 100644 --- a/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/i2c.c +++ b/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/i2c.c @@ -25,8 +25,8 @@ struct s3fwrn5_i2c_phy { struct i2c_client *i2c_dev; struct nci_dev *ndev;
- unsigned int gpio_en; - unsigned int gpio_fw_wake; + int gpio_en; + int gpio_fw_wake;
struct mutex mutex;
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 12:33:37AM +0900, bongsu.jeon2@gmail.com wrote:
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzk@kernel.org
GPIOs - as returned by of_get_named_gpio() and used by the gpiolib - are signed integers, where negative number indicates error. The return value of of_get_named_gpio() should not be assigned to an unsigned int because in case of !CONFIG_GPIOLIB such number would be a valid GPIO.
Fixes: c04c674fadeb ("nfc: s3fwrn5: Add driver for Samsung S3FWRN5 NFC Chip") Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzk@kernel.org
Why do you send my patch?
Best regards, Krzysztof
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 2:06 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski krzk@kernel.org wrote:
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 12:33:37AM +0900, bongsu.jeon2@gmail.com wrote:
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzk@kernel.org
GPIOs - as returned by of_get_named_gpio() and used by the gpiolib - are signed integers, where negative number indicates error. The return value of of_get_named_gpio() should not be assigned to an unsigned int because in case of !CONFIG_GPIOLIB such number would be a valid GPIO.
Fixes: c04c674fadeb ("nfc: s3fwrn5: Add driver for Samsung S3FWRN5 NFC Chip") Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzk@kernel.org
Why do you send my patch?
I think that your patch should be applied before refactoring for this driver. So, I applied your patch to net-next branch and included your patch at my patch list. Is this the wrong process?
Best regards, Krzysztof
On 11/27/20, Bongsu Jeon bs.jeon87@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 2:06 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski krzk@kernel.org wrote:
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 12:33:37AM +0900, bongsu.jeon2@gmail.com wrote:
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzk@kernel.org
GPIOs - as returned by of_get_named_gpio() and used by the gpiolib - are signed integers, where negative number indicates error. The return value of of_get_named_gpio() should not be assigned to an unsigned int because in case of !CONFIG_GPIOLIB such number would be a valid GPIO.
Fixes: c04c674fadeb ("nfc: s3fwrn5: Add driver for Samsung S3FWRN5 NFC Chip") Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzk@kernel.org
Why do you send my patch?
I think that your patch should be applied before refactoring for this driver. So, I applied your patch to net-next branch and included your patch at my patch list. Is this the wrong process?
Sorry to confuse you. I found your patch when i updated my workspace using git pull.
Best regards, Krzysztof
linux-stable-mirror@lists.linaro.org
-
Bongsu Jeon -
Bongsu Jeon -
bongsu.jeon2＠gmail.com
-
Krzysztof Kozlowski