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]

Date:	Wed, 1 Jun 2016 11:29:29 -0400
From:	Rhyland Klein <rklein@...dia.com>
To:	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
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 5/31/2016 3:30 AM, Lee Jones wrote:
> 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.
> 

Ok, thanks.

-rhyland

-- 
nvpublic