[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAK8P3a2dADAG9-NnsR8opP++xq6T_BB3C6i-wvkzrKvXNOghiQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 30 May 2020 14:40:54 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Cc: Viresh Kumar <vireshk@...nel.org>, Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
Georgi Djakov <georgi.djakov@...aro.org>,
Sibi Sankar <sibis@...eaurora.org>,
Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>,
Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@...eaurora.org>,
Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] opp: avoid uninitialized-variable use
On Sat, May 30, 2020 at 11:21 AM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org> wrote:
> On 29-05-20, 22:17, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > An uninitialized pointer is passed into another function but
> > --- a/drivers/opp/core.c
> > +++ b/drivers/opp/core.c
> > @@ -872,7 +872,7 @@ int dev_pm_opp_set_rate(struct device *dev, unsigned long target_freq)
> > goto put_opp_table;
> > }
> >
> > - ret = _set_opp_bw(opp_table, opp, dev, true);
> > + ret = _set_opp_bw(opp_table, NULL, dev, true);
> > if (ret)
> > return ret;
> >
>
> Not sure why people are still seeing this, I pushed a fix for this 2
> days back.
I was on next-20200528, which was the first version that was broken for me,
and I sent all my fixes after I had tested them. Since a lot of things
got broken
at once that day, it took me until the end of 20200529 to get it all tested
properly and then send them out.
Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists