linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] soc: qcom: rpmh-rsc: drop redundant unsigned >=0 comparision

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: <df82a955-9de9-5c53-fe59-059273ced83d@linaro.org>
Date:   Mon, 15 May 2023 12:03:10 +0200
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
        Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] soc: qcom: rpmh-rsc: drop redundant unsigned >=0
 comparision

On 15/05/2023 11:36, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> 
> 
> On 13.05.2023 13:29, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> Unsigned int "minor" is always >= 0 as reported by Smatch:
>>
>>   drivers/soc/qcom/rpmh-rsc.c:1076 rpmh_rsc_probe() warn: always true condition '(drv->ver.minor >= 0) => (0-u32max >= 0)'
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
>> ---
> I can see how it made sense from a human POV, but then it still
> does with the right hand side removed..

I would argue that for human it does not make sense. Why checking minor
for >=0? Even if minor ver could be negative (error case?), what would
that mean in that context? major ver == 3 but minor == ERRNO, so we will
have drv->regs == 2.7?

Best regards,
Krzysztof