linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH next] media: synopsys: hdmirx: Fix signedness bug in hdmirx_parse

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: <51d0781b-1da4-46c6-b772-718d7833798e@collabora.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2025 12:47:00 +0300
From: Dmitry Osipenko <dmitry.osipenko@...labora.com>
To: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>
Cc: Shreeya Patel <shreeya.patel@...labora.com>,
 Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>, Hans Verkuil
 <hverkuil@...all.nl>, Dingxian Wen <shawn.wen@...k-chips.com>,
 linux-media@...r.kernel.org, kernel@...labora.com,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH next] media: synopsys: hdmirx: Fix signedness bug in
 hdmirx_parse_dt()

On 3/7/25 12:45, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 07, 2025 at 12:36:47PM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>> On 3/7/25 12:30, Dan Carpenter wrote:
>>> diff --git a/drivers/media/platform/synopsys/hdmirx/snps_hdmirx.c b/drivers/media/platform/synopsys/hdmirx/snps_hdmirx.c
>>> index 4ffc86ad6c35..e0d3fed87a92 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/media/platform/synopsys/hdmirx/snps_hdmirx.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/media/platform/synopsys/hdmirx/snps_hdmirx.c
>>> @@ -154,7 +154,7 @@ struct snps_hdmirx_dev {
>>>  	bool hpd_trigger_level_high;
>>>  	bool tmds_clk_ratio;
>>>  	bool plugged;
>>> -	u32 num_clks;
>>> +	int num_clks;
>>>  	u32 edid_blocks_written;
>>>  	u32 cur_fmt_fourcc;
>>>  	u32 color_depth;
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Dmitry Osipenko <dmitry.osipenko@...labora.com>
>>
>> Would be also good to return the original error code. There is no need
>> to check for the < 1 clock, it should be the < 0 check. Can be done in a
>> separate patch later. Thanks for the fix!
> 
> I'm not very familiar with th edevm_clk_bulk_get_all() function and it's
> not documented.  But clk_bulk_get_all() does return zero, so I can see why
> people would be confused.

We will take care of it, thanks again.

-- 
Best regards,
Dmitry