[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <fb56444939325cc173e752ba199abd7aeae3bf12.1742852847.git.jpoimboe@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2025 14:56:11 -0700
From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>
To: x86@...nel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>,
Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@...gle.com>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
Uwe Kleine-König <ukleinek@...nel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 21/22] pwm: mediatek: Prevent divide-by-zero in pwm_mediatek_config()
With CONFIG_COMPILE_TEST && !CONFIG_CLK, pwm_mediatek_config() has a
divide-by-zero in the following line:
do_div(resolution, clk_get_rate(pc->clk_pwms[pwm->hwpwm]));
due to the fact that the !CONFIG_CLK version of clk_get_rate() returns
zero.
This is presumably just a theoretical problem: COMPILE_TEST overrides
the dependency on RALINK which would select COMMON_CLK. Regardless it's
a good idea to check for the error explicitly to avoid divide-by-zero.
Fixes the following warning:
drivers/pwm/pwm-mediatek.o: warning: objtool: .text: unexpected end of section
Cc: Uwe Kleine-König <ukleinek@...nel.org>
Signed-off-by: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>
---
drivers/pwm/pwm-mediatek.c | 8 ++++++--
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-mediatek.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-mediatek.c
index 01dfa0fab80a..7eaab5831499 100644
--- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-mediatek.c
+++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-mediatek.c
@@ -121,21 +121,25 @@ static int pwm_mediatek_config(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm,
struct pwm_mediatek_chip *pc = to_pwm_mediatek_chip(chip);
u32 clkdiv = 0, cnt_period, cnt_duty, reg_width = PWMDWIDTH,
reg_thres = PWMTHRES;
+ unsigned long clk_rate;
u64 resolution;
int ret;
ret = pwm_mediatek_clk_enable(chip, pwm);
-
if (ret < 0)
return ret;
+ clk_rate = clk_get_rate(pc->clk_pwms[pwm->hwpwm]);
+ if (!clk_rate)
+ return -EINVAL;
+
/* Make sure we use the bus clock and not the 26MHz clock */
if (pc->soc->has_ck_26m_sel)
writel(0, pc->regs + PWM_CK_26M_SEL);
/* Using resolution in picosecond gets accuracy higher */
resolution = (u64)NSEC_PER_SEC * 1000;
- do_div(resolution, clk_get_rate(pc->clk_pwms[pwm->hwpwm]));
+ do_div(resolution, clk_rate);
cnt_period = DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST_ULL((u64)period_ns * 1000, resolution);
while (cnt_period > 8191) {
--
2.48.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists