From: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>
To: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <garsilva@embeddedor.com>
Cc: "Hartmut Knaack" <knaack.h@gmx.de>,
"Lars-Peter Clausen" <lars@metafoo.de>,
"Peter Meerwald-Stadler" <pmeerw@pmeerw.net>,
linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Marc Titinger" <marc.titinger@baylibre.com>,
"Stefan Brüns" <stefan.bruens@rwth-aachen.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iio: adc: ina2xx: Use 64-bit arithmetic instead of 32-bit
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2018 12:38:36 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180217123836.61cb3b25@archlinux> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180213165258.GA12967@embeddedor.com>
On Tue, 13 Feb 2018 10:52:58 -0600
"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <garsilva@embeddedor.com> wrote:
> Add suffix ULL to constant 1000 in order to give the compiler complete
> information about the proper arithmetic to use. Notice that this
> constant is used in a context that expects an expression of type
> u64 (64 bits, unsigned).
>
> The expression 1000 * sampling_us is currently being evaluated
> using 32-bit arithmetic.
>
> Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1463793
> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <garsilva@embeddedor.com>
I've been trying to figure out if this matters in reality.
i.e. whether or not sampling_us is big enough for us to need
64 bit multiplication.
It's equal to the output for the macro SAMPLING_PERIOD(c)
(int_time_vbus + int_time_vshunt) * avg
So taking max values
(8244 + 68100) * 1024 = 78176256
Then * 1000 which brings it well into the > 32bit range.
So the next question is when was this introduced.
I guess it was Stefan's recent patch but haven't checked yet...
Marc / Stephan, could you check if we are correct in thinking this is a real
bug rather than just a numerical oddity?
Thanks,
Jonathan
> ---
> drivers/iio/adc/ina2xx-adc.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/iio/adc/ina2xx-adc.c b/drivers/iio/adc/ina2xx-adc.c
> index 0635a79..8649700 100644
> --- a/drivers/iio/adc/ina2xx-adc.c
> +++ b/drivers/iio/adc/ina2xx-adc.c
> @@ -810,7 +810,7 @@ static int ina2xx_capture_thread(void *data)
> * multiple times, i.e. samples are dropped.
> */
> do {
> - timespec64_add_ns(&next, 1000 * sampling_us);
> + timespec64_add_ns(&next, 1000ULL * sampling_us);
> delta = timespec64_sub(next, now);
> delay_us = div_s64(timespec64_to_ns(&delta), 1000);
> } while (delay_us <= 0);
prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-02-17 12:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-02-13 16:52 [PATCH] iio: adc: ina2xx: Use 64-bit arithmetic instead of 32-bit Gustavo A. R. Silva
2018-02-17 12:38 ` Jonathan Cameron [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180217123836.61cb3b25@archlinux \
--to=jic23@kernel.org \
--cc=garsilva@embeddedor.com \
--cc=knaack.h@gmx.de \
--cc=lars@metafoo.de \
--cc=linux-iio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marc.titinger@baylibre.com \
--cc=pmeerw@pmeerw.net \
--cc=stefan.bruens@rwth-aachen.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.