public inbox for linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
To: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
Cc: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [bug report] ACPI / processor_idle: Add support for Low Power Idle(LPI) states
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 10:12:11 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2a67c6fc-602f-9bce-9dd4-d911789d5c0b@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161025084352.GA21587@elgon.mountain>

Hi Dan,

I am finding it difficult to understand this bug report. Please help.

On 25/10/16 09:43, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> Hello Sudeep Holla,
>
> The patch a36a7fecfe60: "ACPI / processor_idle: Add support for Low
> Power Idle(LPI) states" from Jul 21, 2016, leads to the following
> static checker warning:
>
> 	drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c:1261 acpi_processor_setup_lpi_states()
> 	warn: buffer overflow 'pr->power.lpi_states' 8 <= 9
>
> drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c
>   1250  static int acpi_processor_setup_lpi_states(struct acpi_processor *pr)
>   1251  {
>   1252          int i;
>   1253          struct acpi_lpi_state *lpi;
>   1254          struct cpuidle_state *state;
>   1255          struct cpuidle_driver *drv = &acpi_idle_driver;
>   1256
>   1257          if (!pr->flags.has_lpi)
>   1258                  return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>   1259

Currently CPUIDLE_STATE_MAX = 10 and ACPI_PROCESSOR_MAX_POWER = 8

>   1260          for (i = 0; i < pr->power.count && i < CPUIDLE_STATE_MAX; i++) {
>
                                                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

We have drv->states[10] and pr->power.lpi_states[8] and above check is 
to ensure we take the minimum of the 2 so that the logic continues to 
work if either of these are changed.

>
> Should this be ACPI_PROCESSOR_MAX_POWER?

No, because we don't want to overflow CPUIDLE_STATE_MAX too in case
that's reduced to say 6. pr->power.count is assured to be <=
ACPI_PROCESSOR_MAX_POWER

>
>   1261                  lpi = &pr->power.lpi_states[i];
>                                          ^^^^^^^^^^
> because that's how many elements we have in this array.
>

Yes that's correct but i < CPUIDLE_STATE_MAX is to ensure we don't
overflow drv->states.

Let me know if I am being stupid and not able to understand something here.

-- 
Regards,
Sudeep

  reply	other threads:[~2016-10-25  9:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-10-25  8:43 [bug report] ACPI / processor_idle: Add support for Low Power Idle(LPI) states Dan Carpenter
2016-10-25  9:12 ` Sudeep Holla [this message]
2016-10-25  9:23   ` Dan Carpenter

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=2a67c6fc-602f-9bce-9dd4-d911789d5c0b@arm.com \
    --to=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
    --cc=dan.carpenter@oracle.com \
    --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox