linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] clk:sophgo:clk-cv18xx-pll: Remove uninitialized u32 parameter and variable

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <kzb6ciwjj5u7zf3qnh76odzcq7vwelgwkzyxgxbhmhl7hyrsh3@vde63g6g7slf>
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2024 18:32:31 +0800
From: Inochi Amaoto <inochiama@...il.com>
To: Ragavendra <ragavendra.bn@...il.com>, mturquette@...libre.com, 
	sboyd@...nel.org, unicorn_wang@...look.com, inochiama@...look.com
Cc: linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	Inochi Amaoto <inochiama@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk:sophgo:clk-cv18xx-pll: Remove uninitialized u32
 parameter and variable

On Tue, Nov 12, 2024 at 06:53:18PM -0800, Ragavendra wrote:
> Updating the detected value to 0 in the ipll_find_rate and removing it from the method parameters as it does not depend on external input. Updating the calls to ipll_find_rate as well and removing the u32 val variable from ipll_determine_rate.
> 

You must break into lines with maximum 74 chars.

You title is weird, a more suitable example is
"clk: sophgo: Remove uninitialized variable for CV1800 PLL"

> Fixes: 80fd61ec4612 ("clk: sophgo: Add clock support for CV1800 SoC")
> Signed-off-by: Ragavendra Nagraj <ragavendra.bn@...il.com>
> ---
>  drivers/clk/sophgo/clk-cv18xx-pll.c | 11 +++++------
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/sophgo/clk-cv18xx-pll.c b/drivers/clk/sophgo/clk-cv18xx-pll.c
> index 29e24098bf5f..57981a08fd5f 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/sophgo/clk-cv18xx-pll.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/sophgo/clk-cv18xx-pll.c
> @@ -44,15 +44,15 @@ static unsigned long ipll_recalc_rate(struct clk_hw *hw,
>  			      PLL_GET_POST_DIV_SEL(value));
>  }
>  
> +
>  static int ipll_find_rate(const struct cv1800_clk_pll_limit *limit,
> -			  unsigned long prate, unsigned long *rate,
> -			  u32 *value)
> +			  unsigned long prate, unsigned long *rate)

This break the original logic since the value is used in the caller,
and I see nothing improved.

>  {
>  	unsigned long best_rate = 0;
>  	unsigned long trate = *rate;
>  	unsigned long pre_div_sel = 0, div_sel = 0, post_div_sel = 0;
>  	unsigned long pre, div, post;
> -	u32 detected = *value;
> +	u32 detected = 0;
>  	unsigned long tmp;
>  
>  	for_each_pll_limit_range(pre, &limit->pre_div) {
> @@ -87,11 +87,10 @@ static int ipll_find_rate(const struct cv1800_clk_pll_limit *limit,
>  
>  static int ipll_determine_rate(struct clk_hw *hw, struct clk_rate_request *req)
>  {
> -	u32 val;
>  	struct cv1800_clk_pll *pll = hw_to_cv1800_clk_pll(hw);
>  
>  	return ipll_find_rate(pll->pll_limit, req->best_parent_rate,
> -			      &req->rate, &val);
> +			      &req->rate);
>  }
>  
>  static void pll_get_mode_ctrl(unsigned long div_sel,
> @@ -134,7 +133,7 @@ static int ipll_set_rate(struct clk_hw *hw, unsigned long rate,
>  	unsigned long flags;
>  	struct cv1800_clk_pll *pll = hw_to_cv1800_clk_pll(hw);
>  
> -	ipll_find_rate(pll->pll_limit, parent_rate, &rate, &detected);
> +	ipll_find_rate(pll->pll_limit, parent_rate, &rate);
>  	pll_get_mode_ctrl(PLL_GET_DIV_SEL(detected),
>  			  ipll_check_mode_ctrl_restrict,
>  			  pll->pll_limit, &detected);
> -- 
> 2.46.1
> 

See the kernel test bot log.

Regards,
Inochi