clk: change clk_ops' ->determine_rate() prototype
Hello Boris Brezillon,
This is a semi-automatic email about new static checker warnings.
The patch 4a7c639697ef: "clk: change clk_ops' ->determine_rate() prototype" from Jul 7, 2015, leads to the following Smatch complaint:
drivers/clk/clk.c:458 clk_mux_determine_rate_flags()
error: we previously assumed 'parent' could be null (see line 452)
drivers/clk/clk.c
451 if (core->flags & CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT) {
452 ret = __clk_determine_rate(parent ? parent->hw : NULL,
^^^^^^
Check for NULL.
453 &parent_req);
454 if (ret)
455 return ret;
456
457 best = parent_req.rate;
458 req->best_parent_hw = parent->hw;
^^^^^^^^^^Patch adds unchecked dereference.
459 req->best_parent_rate = best;
460 } else if (parent) {regards,
dan carpenter
Quoted 23 lines · Dan Carpenter
Hello Boris Brezillon,
This is a semi-automatic email about new static checker warnings.
The patch
4a7c639697ef: "clk: changeclk_ops' ->determine_rate() prototype" from Jul 7, 2015, leads to the following Smatch complaint:
drivers/clk/clk.c:458clk_mux_determine_rate_flags()
error: we previously assumed 'parent' could be null (see line 452)
drivers/clk/clk.c451 if (core->flags & CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT) { 452 ret = __clk_determine_rate(parent ? parent->hw : NULL, ^^^^^^Check for NULL.
453 &parent_req); 454 if (ret) 455 return ret; 456 457 best = parent_req.rate; 458 req->best_parent_hw = parent->hw; ^^^^^^^^^^
Quoted 6 lines
Patch adds unchecked dereference.
459 req->best_parent_rate = best; 460 } else if (parent) {
Thanks Dan.
Boris,
It looks like the transformation here isn't equivalent. If parent is NULL here and we don't crash, parent_req->rate == req->rate and before this patch req->rate would be 0 instead. How about this patch squashed in? It includes some of the removals of best_parent_* assignments that you had in your follow-up patch, because those make it equivalent to the previous code.
------8<----
drivers/clk/clk.c +3 -7
@@ -455,16 +455,10 @@ clk_mux_determine_rate_flags(struct clk_hw *hw, struct clk_rate_request *req,return ret; best = parent_req.rate; - req->best_parent_hw = parent->hw; - req->best_parent_rate = best; }else if (parent) { best =clk_core_get_rate_nolock (parent); - req->best_parent_hw = parent->hw; - req->best_parent_rate = best; }else { best =clk_core_get_rate_nolock (core); - req->best_parent_hw =NULL ; - req->best_parent_rate =0 ; } goto out;
@@ -810,8 +804,10 @@ static int clk_core_round_rate_nolock(struct clk_core *core,*/ int __clk_determine_rate (struct clk_hw *hw,struct clk_rate_request *req) { -if (!hw) +if (!hw) { + req->rate =0 ;return 0 ; + }return clk_core_round_rate_nolock (hw->core, req); }
Signature · 2 lines
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
Dan, Stephen,
Sorry for the late reply, I was away for a couple of days.
Quoted 17 lines · On Mon, 13 Jul 2015 15:41:15 -0700 Stephen Boyd <[email protected]> wrote:
Quoted 16 lines · Dan Carpenter
Hello Boris Brezillon,
This is a semi-automatic email about new static checker warnings.
The patch
4a7c639697ef: "clk: changeclk_ops' ->determine_rate() prototype" from Jul 7, 2015, leads to the following Smatch complaint:
drivers/clk/clk.c:458clk_mux_determine_rate_flags()
error: we previously assumed 'parent' could be null (see line 452)
drivers/clk/clk.c451 if (core->flags & CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT) { 452 ret = __clk_determine_rate(parent ? parent->hw : NULL, ^^^^^^Check for NULL.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 8 lines
453 &parent_req); 454 if (ret) 455 return ret; 456 457 best = parent_req.rate; 458 req->best_parent_hw = parent->hw; ^^^^^^^^^^Patch adds unchecked dereference.
Yes, you're absolutely right.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 5 lines
459 req->best_parent_rate = best; 460 } else if (parent) {Thanks Dan.
Quoted 8 lines
Boris,
It looks like the transformation here isn't equivalent. If parent is NULL here and we don't crash,
parent_req->rate==req->rateand before this patchreq->ratewould be 0 instead. How about this patch squashed in? It includes some of the removals of best_parent_* assignments that you had in your follow-up patch, because those make it equivalent to the previous code.
And yes, I noticed some instructions were useless while reworking the determine_rate implementation to return error codes instead of 0, and the patch you're proposing here looks good to me. Feel free to squash it with the previous one.
Thanks to both of you.
Best Regards,
Boris
Quoted 37 lines
------8<----
drivers/clk/clk.c +3
-7@@ -455,16 +455,10 @@ clk_mux_determine_rate_flags(struct clk_hw *hw, struct clk_rate_request *req,return ret; best = parent_req.rate; - req->best_parent_hw = parent->hw; - req->best_parent_rate = best; }else if (parent) { best =clk_core_get_rate_nolock (parent); - req->best_parent_hw = parent->hw; - req->best_parent_rate = best; }else { best =clk_core_get_rate_nolock (core); - req->best_parent_hw =NULL ; - req->best_parent_rate =0 ; } goto out;@@ -810,8 +804,10 @@ static int clk_core_round_rate_nolock(struct clk_core *core,*/ int __clk_determine_rate (struct clk_hw *hw,struct clk_rate_request *req) { -if (!hw) +if (!hw) { + req->rate =0 ;return 0 ; + }return clk_core_round_rate_nolock (hw->core, req); }
Signature · 3 lines
Boris Brezillon, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com