linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] ARM: da850: fix da850_set

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: <4b1d65f7-d9a6-6d4e-00f5-2835b728661c@ti.com>
Date:   Fri, 2 Dec 2016 16:50:55 +0530
From:   Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@...com>
To:     Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>,
        Kevin Hilman <khilman@...libre.com>,
        Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@...com>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>
CC:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        arm-soc <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] ARM: da850: fix da850_set_pll0rate()

On Thursday 01 December 2016 10:45 PM, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> This function is broken - its second argument is an index to the freq
> table, not the requested clock rate in Hz. It leads to an oops when
> called from clk_set_rate() since this argument isn't bounds checked
> either.
> 
> Fix it by iterating over the array of supported frequencies and
> selecting a one that matches or returning -EINVAL for unsupported
> rates.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>

When this function was written, it was written for speed. The only user
of setting pll0 rate is drivers/cpufreq/davinci-cpufreq.c (not sure how
you were trying to set pll0 rate). And that driver directly passes the
table index to the set_rate() function.

The idea was to optimize for speed in cpufreq driver and quickly index
into the pll data instead of searching through it.

But I agree, it is confusing and we are better off with maintainable
code. So, no problem with the patch, but this needs to be done along
with updates to cpufreq driver.

> ---
>  arch/arm/mach-davinci/da850.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++----
>  1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/da850.c b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/da850.c
> index 855b720..1c0f296 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/da850.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/da850.c
> @@ -1173,14 +1173,28 @@ static int da850_set_armrate(struct clk *clk, unsigned long index)
>  	return clk_set_rate(pllclk, index);
>  }
>  
> -static int da850_set_pll0rate(struct clk *clk, unsigned long index)
> +static int da850_set_pll0rate(struct clk *clk, unsigned long requested_rate)

Calling it just 'rate' is fine, IMO. The name of the function is enough
to suggest that its the rate to be set to.

Thanks,
Sekhar