* [PATCH 1/2] cpufreq: exynos: Fix unsigned variable being checked for negative value
@ 2013-01-23 9:22 Sachin Kamat
2013-01-23 9:22 ` [PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: exynos: Initialise return variable Sachin Kamat
2013-01-25 18:24 ` [PATCH 1/2] cpufreq: exynos: Fix unsigned variable being checked for negative value Kukjin Kim
0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Sachin Kamat @ 2013-01-23 9:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-samsung-soc; +Cc: kgene.kim, rjw, jhbird.choi, sachin.kamat, patches
exynos_cpufreq_scale function returns signed value which was
assigned to an unsigned variable and checked for negative value which
is always false. Hence make it signed.
Fixes the following smatch warnings:
drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:83 exynos_cpufreq_scale() warn:
unsigned 'old_index' is never less than zero.
drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:89 exynos_cpufreq_scale() warn:
unsigned 'index' is never less than zero.
Signed-off-by: Sachin Kamat <sachin.kamat@linaro.org>
---
Rafael J. Wysocki suggested these 2 patches be taken through the
Samsung tree.
---
drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c | 2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c
index 218b3ce..88401ba 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c
@@ -65,7 +65,7 @@ static int exynos_cpufreq_scale(unsigned int target_freq)
struct cpufreq_policy *policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(0);
unsigned int arm_volt, safe_arm_volt = 0;
unsigned int mpll_freq_khz = exynos_info->mpll_freq_khz;
- unsigned int index, old_index;
+ int index, old_index;
int ret = 0;
freqs.old = policy->cur;
--
1.7.4.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: exynos: Initialise return variable
2013-01-23 9:22 [PATCH 1/2] cpufreq: exynos: Fix unsigned variable being checked for negative value Sachin Kamat
@ 2013-01-23 9:22 ` Sachin Kamat
2013-01-25 18:26 ` Kukjin Kim
2013-01-25 18:24 ` [PATCH 1/2] cpufreq: exynos: Fix unsigned variable being checked for negative value Kukjin Kim
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Sachin Kamat @ 2013-01-23 9:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-samsung-soc; +Cc: kgene.kim, rjw, jhbird.choi, sachin.kamat, patches
'ret' is undefined when the function returns from the first
'if' condition. Without this patch we get the following warning:
drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c: In function ‘exynos_target’:
drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:182:2: warning:
‘ret’ may be used uninitialized in this function [-Wuninitialized]
Suggested-by: Jonghwan Choi <jhbird.choi@samsung.com>
Signed-off-by: Sachin Kamat <sachin.kamat@linaro.org>
---
drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c | 2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c
index 88401ba..4268e46 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c
@@ -159,7 +159,7 @@ static int exynos_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
{
struct cpufreq_frequency_table *freq_table = exynos_info->freq_table;
unsigned int index;
- int ret;
+ int ret = 0;
mutex_lock(&cpufreq_lock);
--
1.7.4.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* RE: [PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: exynos: Initialise return variable
2013-01-23 9:22 ` [PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: exynos: Initialise return variable Sachin Kamat
@ 2013-01-25 18:26 ` Kukjin Kim
2013-01-25 19:58 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Kukjin Kim @ 2013-01-25 18:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 'Sachin Kamat', linux-samsung-soc; +Cc: rjw, jhbird.choi, patches
Sachin Kamat wrote:
>
> 'ret' is undefined when the function returns from the first
> 'if' condition. Without this patch we get the following warning:
>
> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c: In function ‘exynos_target’:
> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:182:2: warning:
> ‘ret’ may be used uninitialized in this function [-Wuninitialized]
>
> Suggested-by: Jonghwan Choi <jhbird.choi@samsung.com>
I modified above to 'Reported-by' because checkpatch complains like following...
WARNING: Non-standard signature: Suggested-by:
#10:
Suggested-by: Jonghwan Choi <jhbird.choi@samsung.com>
> Signed-off-by: Sachin Kamat <sachin.kamat@linaro.org>
> ---
> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c | 2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
Applied, thanks.
- Kukjin
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: exynos: Initialise return variable
2013-01-25 18:26 ` Kukjin Kim
@ 2013-01-25 19:58 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-02-01 1:11 ` Kukjin Kim
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2013-01-25 19:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Kukjin Kim
Cc: 'Sachin Kamat', linux-samsung-soc, jhbird.choi, patches
On Friday, January 25, 2013 10:26:41 AM Kukjin Kim wrote:
> Sachin Kamat wrote:
> >
> > 'ret' is undefined when the function returns from the first
> > 'if' condition. Without this patch we get the following warning:
> >
> > drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c: In function ‘exynos_target’:
> > drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:182:2: warning:
> > ‘ret’ may be used uninitialized in this function [-Wuninitialized]
> >
> > Suggested-by: Jonghwan Choi <jhbird.choi@samsung.com>
>
> I modified above to 'Reported-by' because checkpatch complains like following...
>
> WARNING: Non-standard signature: Suggested-by:
> #10:
> Suggested-by: Jonghwan Choi <jhbird.choi@samsung.com>
This tag has been used already, though, and I think it makes sense (more than
Reported-by in this case). I think it may be regarded as standard regardless
of what checkpatch has to say about that. :-)
Thanks,
Rafael
--
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: exynos: Initialise return variable
2013-01-25 19:58 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
@ 2013-02-01 1:11 ` Kukjin Kim
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Kukjin Kim @ 2013-02-01 1:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 'Rafael J. Wysocki'
Cc: 'Sachin Kamat', linux-samsung-soc, jhbird.choi, patches
Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
> On Friday, January 25, 2013 10:26:41 AM Kukjin Kim wrote:
> > Sachin Kamat wrote:
> > >
> > > 'ret' is undefined when the function returns from the first
> > > 'if' condition. Without this patch we get the following warning:
> > >
> > > drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c: In function ‘exynos_target’:
> > > drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:182:2: warning:
> > > ‘ret’ may be used uninitialized in this function [-Wuninitialized]
> > >
> > > Suggested-by: Jonghwan Choi <jhbird.choi@samsung.com>
> >
> > I modified above to 'Reported-by' because checkpatch complains like
> following...
> >
> > WARNING: Non-standard signature: Suggested-by:
> > #10:
> > Suggested-by: Jonghwan Choi <jhbird.choi@samsung.com>
>
> This tag has been used already, though, and I think it makes sense (more
> than
Yes, agreed.
> Reported-by in this case). I think it may be regarded as standard regardless
> of what checkpatch has to say about that. :-)
>
I see. Let me keep the 'Reported-by' here.
Thanks for your opinion.
- Kukjin
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH 1/2] cpufreq: exynos: Fix unsigned variable being checked for negative value
2013-01-23 9:22 [PATCH 1/2] cpufreq: exynos: Fix unsigned variable being checked for negative value Sachin Kamat
2013-01-23 9:22 ` [PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: exynos: Initialise return variable Sachin Kamat
@ 2013-01-25 18:24 ` Kukjin Kim
1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Kukjin Kim @ 2013-01-25 18:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 'Sachin Kamat', linux-samsung-soc; +Cc: rjw, jhbird.choi, patches
Sachin Kamat wrote:
>
> exynos_cpufreq_scale function returns signed value which was
> assigned to an unsigned variable and checked for negative value which
> is always false. Hence make it signed.
>
> Fixes the following smatch warnings:
> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:83 exynos_cpufreq_scale() warn:
> unsigned 'old_index' is never less than zero.
> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:89 exynos_cpufreq_scale() warn:
> unsigned 'index' is never less than zero.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sachin Kamat <sachin.kamat@linaro.org>
> ---
> Rafael J. Wysocki suggested these 2 patches be taken through the
> Samsung tree.
> ---
> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c | 2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
Looks OK to me, applied.
Thanks.
- Kukjin
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-02-01 1:11 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2013-01-23 9:22 [PATCH 1/2] cpufreq: exynos: Fix unsigned variable being checked for negative value Sachin Kamat
2013-01-23 9:22 ` [PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: exynos: Initialise return variable Sachin Kamat
2013-01-25 18:26 ` Kukjin Kim
2013-01-25 19:58 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-02-01 1:11 ` Kukjin Kim
2013-01-25 18:24 ` [PATCH 1/2] cpufreq: exynos: Fix unsigned variable being checked for negative value Kukjin Kim
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox