On 05/10, Priit Laes wrote:
> On Mon, 2016-05-09 at 15:39 -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > On 05/09, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Ok I applied this one to clk-next.
> > >
> > And I squashed this in to silence the following checker warning.
> >
> > drivers/clk/sunxi/clk-sun4i-display.c:110:33: warning: Variable
> > length array is used.
> >
> > ---8<---
> > diff --git a/drivers/clk/sunxi/clk-sun4i-display.c
> > b/drivers/clk/sunxi/clk-sun4i-display.c
> > index f02e250e64ed..f8ff6c4a5633 100644
> > --- a/drivers/clk/sunxi/clk-sun4i-display.c
> > +++ b/drivers/clk/sunxi/clk-sun4i-display.c
> > @@ -107,7 +107,7 @@ static int sun4i_a10_display_reset_xlate(struct
> > reset_controller_dev *rcdev,
> > static void __init sun4i_a10_display_init(struct device_node *node,
> > const struct
> > sun4i_a10_display_clk_data *data)
> > {
> > - const char *parents[data->parents];
> > + const char *parents[4];
>
> This change breaks at least de_[bf]e clocks which have 3 clock parents.
>
I just used the largest data->parents number, which was 4. How
does that break anything?
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
