Re: [PATCH v2] platform/x86: Move Lenovo files into lenovo subdir

[Mark Pearson]

Hi,

On Fri, Jun 6, 2025, at 11:58 AM, kernel test robot wrote:
> Hi Mark,
>
> kernel test robot noticed the following build warnings:
>
> [auto build test WARNING on linus/master]
> [also build test WARNING on next-20250606]
> [cannot apply to v6.15]
> [If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note.
> And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in
> https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch#_base_tree_information]
>
> url:    
> https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Mark-Pearson/platform-x86-Move-Lenovo-files-into-lenovo-subdir/20250605-013934
> base:   linus/master
> patch link:    
> https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250604173702.3025074-1-mpearson-lenovo%40squebb.ca
> patch subject: [PATCH v2] platform/x86: Move Lenovo files into lenovo 
> subdir
> config: x86_64-randconfig-078-20250606 
> (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250606/202506062319.F0IpDxF6-lkp@xxxxxxxxx/config)
> compiler: gcc-12 (Debian 12.2.0-14) 12.2.0
> reproduce (this is a W=1 build): 
> (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250606/202506062319.F0IpDxF6-lkp@xxxxxxxxx/reproduce)
>
> If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new 
> version of
> the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags
> | Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx>
> | Closes: 
> https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202506062319.F0IpDxF6-lkp@xxxxxxxxx/
>
> All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>):
>
>    drivers/platform/x86/lenovo/think-lmi.c: In function 'certificate_store':
>>> drivers/platform/x86/lenovo/think-lmi.c:661:47: warning: '%s' directive argument is null [-Wformat-overflow=]
>      661 |                 return kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "%s,%s", arg1, 
> arg2);
>          |                                               ^~
>    drivers/platform/x86/lenovo/think-lmi.c:657:50: warning: '%s' 
> directive argument is null [-Wformat-overflow=]
>      657 |                 return kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "%s,%s,%s",
>          |                                                  ^~
>
>
> vim +661 drivers/platform/x86/lenovo/think-lmi.c
>
> 640a5fa50a42b9 drivers/platform/x86/think-lmi.c Mark Pearson 2021-11-17 
>  652  
> 5dcb5ef125907d drivers/platform/x86/think-lmi.c Mark Pearson 2024-10-24 
>  653  static char *cert_command(struct tlmi_pwd_setting *setting, const 
> char *arg1, const char *arg2)
> 5dcb5ef125907d drivers/platform/x86/think-lmi.c Mark Pearson 2024-10-24 
>  654  {
> 5dcb5ef125907d drivers/platform/x86/think-lmi.c Mark Pearson 2024-10-24 
>  655  	/* Prepend with SVC or SMC if multicert supported */
> 5dcb5ef125907d drivers/platform/x86/think-lmi.c Mark Pearson 2024-10-24 
>  656  	if (tlmi_priv.pwdcfg.core.password_mode >= 
> TLMI_PWDCFG_MODE_MULTICERT)
> 5dcb5ef125907d drivers/platform/x86/think-lmi.c Mark Pearson 2024-10-24 
>  657  		return kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "%s,%s,%s",
> 5dcb5ef125907d drivers/platform/x86/think-lmi.c Mark Pearson 2024-10-24 
>  658  				 setting == tlmi_priv.pwd_admin ? "SVC" : "SMC",
> 5dcb5ef125907d drivers/platform/x86/think-lmi.c Mark Pearson 2024-10-24 
>  659  				 arg1, arg2);
> 5dcb5ef125907d drivers/platform/x86/think-lmi.c Mark Pearson 2024-10-24 
>  660  	else
> 5dcb5ef125907d drivers/platform/x86/think-lmi.c Mark Pearson 2024-10-24 
> @661  		return kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "%s,%s", arg1, arg2);
> 5dcb5ef125907d drivers/platform/x86/think-lmi.c Mark Pearson 2024-10-24 
>  662  }
> 5dcb5ef125907d drivers/platform/x86/think-lmi.c Mark Pearson 2024-10-24 
>  663  
>
> -- 
> 0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service
> https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki

I'm unable to reproduce this issue with a W=1 build and I think it's a false positive.

Am I safe to ignore this report?

Mark