[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220209152609.gqeivcehkuzgz3sk@pengutronix.de>
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2022 16:26:09 +0100
From: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
To: Qing Wang <wangqing@...o.com>
Cc: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>, linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pwm: use div64_u64() instead of do_div()
Hello,
On Wed, Feb 09, 2022 at 12:39:58AM -0800, Qing Wang wrote:
> From: Wang Qing <wangqing@...o.com>
>
> do_div() does a 64-by-32 division.
> When the divisor is u64, do_div() truncates it to 32 bits, this means it
> can test non-zero and be truncated to zero for division.
>
> fix do_div.cocci warning:
> do_div() does a 64-by-32 division, please consider using div64_u64 instead.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wang Qing <wangqing@...o.com>
> ---
> drivers/pwm/pwm-berlin.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-berlin.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-berlin.c
> index e157273..15b10cb3
> --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-berlin.c
> +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-berlin.c
> @@ -109,7 +109,7 @@ static int berlin_pwm_config(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm,
>
> period = cycles;
> cycles *= duty_ns;
> - do_div(cycles, period_ns);
> + div64_u64(cycles, period_ns);
This is wrong, div64_u64() has a different calling convention than do_div().
The issue however is real. Please add
Fixes: 30dffb42fcd4 ("pwm: berlin: Implement .apply() callback")
to your v2.
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists