From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751407AbcDPNtp (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Apr 2016 09:49:45 -0400 Received: from youngberry.canonical.com ([91.189.89.112]:41825 "EHLO youngberry.canonical.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751246AbcDPNto (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Apr 2016 09:49:44 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH] PM / clk: ensure we don't allocate a -ve size of count clks To: Pavel Machek References: <1460811003-31806-1-git-send-email-colin.king@canonical.com> <20160416125235.GB31772@amd> Cc: "Rafael J . Wysocki" , Len Brown , linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Colin Ian King Message-ID: <571242F4.5080103@canonical.com> Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2016 14:49:40 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160416125235.GB31772@amd> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 16/04/16 13:52, Pavel Machek wrote: > On Sat 2016-04-16 13:50:03, Colin King wrote: >> From: Colin Ian King >> >> It is entirely possible for of_count_phandle_wit_args to >> return a -ve error return value so we need to check for this >> otherwise we end up allocating a negative number of clk objects. >> >> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King > > Acked-by: Pavel Machek > > >> diff --git a/drivers/base/power/clock_ops.c b/drivers/base/power/clock_ops.c >> index 0e64a1b..3657ac1 100644 >> --- a/drivers/base/power/clock_ops.c >> +++ b/drivers/base/power/clock_ops.c >> @@ -159,7 +159,7 @@ int of_pm_clk_add_clks(struct device *dev) >> >> count = of_count_phandle_with_args(dev->of_node, "clocks", >> "#clock-cells"); >> - if (count == 0) >> + if (count <= 0) >> return -ENODEV; > > Would it make sense to propagate the error value? I don't think it will contribute much more than the current return. > > Pavel >