[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0c616d01-f90b-472b-bddf-d4441e9159e4@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2024 11:45:13 +0200
From: Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@...il.com>
To: Zicheng Qu <quzicheng@...wei.com>, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: tanghui20@...wei.com, zhangqiao22@...wei.com, judy.chenhui@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iio: Fix uninitialized symbol 'ret'
On 01/11/2024 05:43, Zicheng Qu wrote:
> Hi Matti,
>
> It might be better but I am not pretty sure whether have to have both
> gains and times, so I modified 'ret' in places where issues might arise,
> rather than adding a restriction in iio_gts_sanity_check().
Yes. Thanks for the fix.
>
> In the corner case, there is a restriction that both num_hwgain and
> num_itime cannot be 0 simultaneously in the iio_gts_sanity_check().
Right. Having both 0 would mean there was nothing at all to handle for
the GTS.
> However, in the gain_to_scaletables() , if num_itime is 1 and num_hwgain
> is 0, the 'gain_bytes' becomes 0 and 'all_gains' is not null after the
> 'for' loop, which causes the subsequent 'while' or 'for' to become
> ineffective, leading to an undefined 'ret' being returned in the
> 'free_out'.
Yes. Thank you for the fix :)
Yours,
-- Matti
Powered by blists - more mailing lists