On 24.01.2019 15:39, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 at 15:34, Kamil Konieczny
> <k.konieczny@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 24.01.2019 14:37, Corentin Labbe wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 05:55:33PM +0100, Kamil Konieczny wrote:
>>>> Add AES crypto HW acceleration for Exynos5433, with the help of SlimSSS IP.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Kamil Konieczny <k.konieczny@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/crypto/s5p-sss.c | 50 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
>>>> 1 file changed, 46 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/crypto/s5p-sss.c b/drivers/crypto/s5p-sss.c
>>>> index 0064be0e3941..e2d247f59254 100644
>>>> [...]
>>>> @@ -240,6 +241,7 @@
>>>> struct samsung_aes_variant {
>>>> unsigned int aes_offset;
>>>> unsigned int hash_offset;
>>>> + char *clk_names[];
>>>
>>> Hello
>>>
>>> this could be set as const
>>
>> Definitions sets const:
>>
>> grep "static const" drivers/crypto/s5p-sss.c
>>
>> static const struct samsung_aes_variant s5p_aes_data = {
>> static const struct samsung_aes_variant exynos_aes_data = {
>> static const struct samsung_aes_variant exynos5433_slim_aes_data = {
>>
>> so it is not needed at struct declaration, or am I missing something ?
>
> The struct contains the pointer, so the pointer will be const. However
> the pointer can point to either const string or non-const string.
> That's the Corentin's comment about. So in fact as he says - this
> should be a pointer to a const string.
Thank you for clarifing this, I will send v3 soon.
--
Best regards,
Kamil Konieczny
Samsung R&D Institute Poland
