linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v11 06/12] pwm: imx27: Use 64-bit division macro and function

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: <20200331204929.GC2954599@ulmo>
Date:   Tue, 31 Mar 2020 22:49:29 +0200
From:   Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
To:     Guru Das Srinagesh <gurus@...eaurora.org>
Cc:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Linux PWM List <linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org>,
        Uwe Kleine-König 
        <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>,
        Subbaraman Narayanamurthy <subbaram@...eaurora.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
        Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
        Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
        Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>,
        NXP Linux Team <linux-imx@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 06/12] pwm: imx27: Use 64-bit division macro and
 function

On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 01:20:58PM -0700, Guru Das Srinagesh wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 05:24:52PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 10:44 PM Guru Das Srinagesh
> > <gurus@...eaurora.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 06:09:39PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 2:42 AM Guru Das Srinagesh <gurus@...eaurora.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > @@ -240,8 +240,7 @@ static int pwm_imx27_apply(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm,
> > > > >
> > > > >         period_cycles /= prescale;
> > > > >         c = (unsigned long long)period_cycles * state->duty_cycle;
> > > > > -       do_div(c, state->period);
> > > > > -       duty_cycles = c;
> > > > > +       duty_cycles = div64_u64(c, state->period);
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > This change looks fine, but I wonder if the code directly above it
> > > >
> > > >         c = clk_get_rate(imx->clk_per);
> > > >         c *= state->period;
> > > >         do_div(c, 1000000000);
> > > >         period_cycles = c;
> > > >
> > > > might run into an overflow when both the clock rate and the period
> > > > are large numbers.
> > >
> > > Hmm. Seems to me like addressing this would be outside the scope of this
> > > patch series.
> > 
> > I think it should be part of the same series, addressing bugs that
> > were introduced
> > by the change to 64-bit period. If it's not getting fixed along with
> > the other regressions,
> > I fear nobody is going to go back and fix it later.
> 
> Makes sense, I agree. Would this be an acceptable fix?
> 
> Instead of multiplying c and state->period first and then dividing by
> 10^9, first divide state->period by 10^9 and then multiply the quotient
> of that division with c and assign it to period_cycles. Like so:
> 
> 	c = clk_get_rate(imx->clk_per);
> 	c *= div_u64(state->period, 1000000000);
> 	period_cycles = c;
> 
> This should take care of overflow not happening because state->period is
> converted from nanoseconds to seconds early on and so becomes a small
> number.

Doesn't that mean that anything below a 1 second period will be clamped
to just 0?

Thierry

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)