From: "Colin King (gmail)" <colin.i.king@gmail.com>
To: Michael Tretter <m.tretter@pengutronix.de>
Cc: "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>,
Michal Simek <michal.simek@amd.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
kernel@pengutronix.de
Subject: Re: soc: xilinx: vcu: issue with 2nd null check on pointer divider
Date: Thu, 8 May 2025 12:04:41 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b431d19f-c144-44c9-887c-a2f3bef7fc1a@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aByOFaMmNqWLNbYM@pengutronix.de>
[-- Attachment #1.1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1629 bytes --]
Hi Michael,
thanks for the update, I forgot I already reported this back in 2021(!).
Perhaps the upstream folk can apply your patch oneday :-/
Colin
On 08/05/2025 11:57, Michael Tretter wrote:
> Hi Colin,
>
> On Thu, 08 May 2025 11:21:05 +0100, Colin King (gmail) wrote:
>> There seems to be an issue with the following function with the second check
>> on if (!divider). Firstly this is redundant code since divider has
>> already been null checked, so I suspect it should be instead if (!mux) but
>> I'm unsure if this is correct since the call to clk_hw_unregister_divider is
>> not made. Also if mux is null, isn't the call to clk_hw_unregister_mux()
>> problematic as a null pointer is being passed to it.
>>
>> static void xvcu_clk_hw_unregister_leaf(struct clk_hw *hw)
>> {
>> struct clk_hw *gate = hw;
>> struct clk_hw *divider;
>> struct clk_hw *mux;
>>
>> if (!gate)
>> return;
>>
>> divider = clk_hw_get_parent(gate);
>> clk_hw_unregister_gate(gate);
>> if (!divider)
>> return;
>>
>> mux = clk_hw_get_parent(divider);
>> clk_hw_unregister_mux(mux);
>> if (!divider)
>> return;
>>
>> clk_hw_unregister_divider(divider);
>> }
>
> I sent a patch [0] to rewrite the function and make it more readable a
> while ago. Unfortunately, there wasn't any reaction to the patch, and
> then I forgot about it.
>
> Michael
>
> [0] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/20210318144230.3438009-1-m.tretter@pengutronix.de/
[-- Attachment #1.1.2: OpenPGP public key --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-keys, Size: 4901 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 840 bytes --]
prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-05-08 11:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-05-08 10:21 soc: xilinx: vcu: issue with 2nd null check on pointer divider Colin King (gmail)
2025-05-08 10:57 ` Michael Tretter
2025-05-08 11:04 ` Colin King (gmail) [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=b431d19f-c144-44c9-887c-a2f3bef7fc1a@gmail.com \
--to=colin.i.king@gmail.com \
--cc=kernel@pengutronix.de \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=m.tretter@pengutronix.de \
--cc=michal.simek@amd.com \
--cc=sboyd@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).