Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: intel_pmc_core: Fix uninitialized pmc/map in pmc_core_send_ltr_ignore

["Ilpo Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com>]

On Thu, 17 Apr 2025, Purva Yeshi wrote:

> Fix Smatch-detected issue:
> 
> drivers/platform/x86/intel/pmc/core.c:501 pmc_core_send_ltr_ignore()
> error: uninitialized symbol 'pmc'.
> 
> drivers/platform/x86/intel/pmc/core.c:501 pmc_core_send_ltr_ignore()
> error: uninitialized symbol 'map'.
> 
> drivers/platform/x86/intel/pmc/core.c:501 pmc_core_send_ltr_ignore()
> error: we previously assumed 'pmc' could be null (see line 479)
> 
> 
> Prevents uninitialized symbol warnings detected by smatch.
> 
> Ensures map is not accessed if pmc is NULL, preventing dereferencing
> of uninitialized pointers
> 
> Add defensive check for pmc and map to catch any unexpected edge cases
> and ensure all required pointers are valid.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Purva Yeshi <purvayeshi550@gmail.com>
> ---
>  drivers/platform/x86/intel/pmc/core.c | 9 ++++++---
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/intel/pmc/core.c b/drivers/platform/x86/intel/pmc/core.c
> index 7a1d11f2914f..e674b940e29e 100644
> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/intel/pmc/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/intel/pmc/core.c
> @@ -462,8 +462,8 @@ DEFINE_SHOW_ATTRIBUTE(pmc_core_pll);
>  
>  int pmc_core_send_ltr_ignore(struct pmc_dev *pmcdev, u32 value, int ignore)
>  {
> -	struct pmc *pmc;
> -	const struct pmc_reg_map *map;
> +	struct pmc *pmc = NULL;
> +	const struct pmc_reg_map *map = NULL;
>  	u32 reg;
>  	unsigned int pmc_index;
>  	int ltr_index;
> @@ -480,6 +480,9 @@ int pmc_core_send_ltr_ignore(struct pmc_dev *pmcdev, u32 value, int ignore)
>  			continue;
>  
>  		map = pmc->map;
> +		if (!map)
> +			continue;

How can this happen?? If pmc is created, it should have a valid ->map 
AFAICT. Did you even read that code at all???

> +
>  		if (ltr_index <= map->ltr_ignore_max)
>  			break;
>  
> @@ -491,7 +494,7 @@ int pmc_core_send_ltr_ignore(struct pmc_dev *pmcdev, u32 value, int ignore)
>  		ltr_index = ltr_index - (map->ltr_ignore_max + 2) - 1;
>  	}
>  
> -	if (pmc_index >= ARRAY_SIZE(pmcdev->pmcs) || ltr_index < 0)
> +	if (pmc_index >= ARRAY_SIZE(pmcdev->pmcs) || ltr_index < 0 || !pmc || !map)

What are the situations pmc_index >= ARRAY_SIZE(pmcdev->pmcs) check 
didn't catch where these new checks do something useful??

Lots of noise but little real substance in this patch?

-- 
 i.