linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mfd: max77620: Fix FPS switch statements

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20160531073022.GA1729@dell>
Date:	Tue, 31 May 2016 08:30:22 +0100
From:	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
To:	Rhyland Klein <rklein@...dia.com>
Cc:	Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>,
	linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mfd: max77620: Fix FPS switch statements

On Fri, 27 May 2016, Rhyland Klein wrote:

> On 5/12/2016 1:52 PM, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
> > 
> > On Thursday 12 May 2016 11:15 PM, Rhyland Klein wrote:
> >> When configuring FPS during probe, assuming a DT node is present for
> >> FPS, the code can run into a problem with the switch statements in
> >> max77620_config_fps() and max77620_get_fps_period_reg_value(). Namely,
> >> in the case of chip->chip_id == MAX77620, it will set
> >> fps_[mix|max]_period but then fall through to the default switch case
> >> and return -EINVAL. Returning this from max77620_config_fps() will
> >> cause probe to fail.
> >>
> > 
> > Thanks for fixes.
> > Missed when converting if-else to switch.
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>
> > 
> 
> Lee, I noticed this hasn't been merged yet, but without it platforms
> using the max77620 can easily (if it has FPS nodes) fail to probe. Is
> there anything blocking it?

Yes, it was sent too late in the cycle.

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog