On 2/26/2026 11:51 PM, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
> Hello Jithu,
>
> On 2/27/26 03:23, Jithu Joseph wrote:
>>
...
>>
>>> +
>>> +int i3c_send_byte(I3CBus *bus, uint8_t data)
>>> +{
>>> + /*
>>> + * Ignored, the caller can determine how many were sent based on if
>>> this was
>>> + * ACKed/NACKed.
>>> + */
>>> + uint32_t num_sent;
>>
>> num_sent is uninitialized here. Even though i3c_send_byte ignores it after
>> the call, it gets passed by pointer into i3c_send() where it is used in the
>> trace_i3c_send() call.
>> If the send callback does not write *num_sent (as is the case with
>> mock_i3c_target_tx, refer my prev comment for patch 18/22), the trace might
>> show garbage. Initializing it to zero might reduce the confusion
>
> Could please send a patch ? I will queue it after this series.
Got it, I will send 2 patches one to address this comment and another one to
address my comment on 18/22, which will apply on-top of this series
>
> Also, since you have tested this series, would mind sending
> a Tested-by tag ? possibly a Reviewed-by too.
You can add my Tested-by for the whole series , I have replied to the
cover-letter with the tag .
I will send in Reviewed-by for the couple of patches I sent review comments for
Jithu
