linux-kernel - [PATCH v7 1/4] pwm: Let pwm_set_waveform_might_sleep() fail for exact but impossible requests

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:  <20538a46719584dafd8a1395c886780a97dcdf79.1746010245.git.u.kleine-koenig@baylibre.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2025 13:55:58 +0200
From: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...libre.com>
To: linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org
Cc: David Lechner <dlechner@...libre.com>,
	Kent Gibson <warthog618@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v7 1/4] pwm: Let pwm_set_waveform_might_sleep() fail for exact but impossible requests

Up to now pwm_set_waveform_might_sleep() returned 1 for exact requests
that couldn't be served exactly. In contrast to
pwm_round_waveform_might_sleep() and pwm_set_waveform_might_sleep() with
exact = false this is an error condition. So simplify handling for
callers of pwm_set_waveform_might_sleep() by returning -EDOM instead of
1 in this case.

Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...libre.com>
---
 drivers/pwm/core.c | 21 ++++++++++++++++-----
 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/pwm/core.c b/drivers/pwm/core.c
index e0a90c4cd723..28cb6ab0f62d 100644
--- a/drivers/pwm/core.c
+++ b/drivers/pwm/core.c
@@ -404,15 +404,16 @@ static int __pwm_set_waveform(struct pwm_device *pwm,
  * Typically a requested waveform cannot be implemented exactly, e.g. because
  * you requested .period_length_ns = 100 ns, but the hardware can only set
  * periods that are a multiple of 8.5 ns. With that hardware passing @exact =
- * true results in pwm_set_waveform_might_sleep() failing and returning 1. If
- * @exact = false you get a period of 93.5 ns (i.e. the biggest period not bigger
- * than the requested value).
+ * true results in pwm_set_waveform_might_sleep() failing and returning -EDOM.
+ * If @exact = false you get a period of 93.5 ns (i.e. the biggest period not
+ * bigger than the requested value).
  * Note that even with @exact = true, some rounding by less than 1 ns is
  * possible/needed. In the above example requesting .period_length_ns = 94 and
  * @exact = true, you get the hardware configured with period = 93.5 ns.
  *
- * Returns: 0 on success, 1 if was rounded up (if !@...ct) or no perfect match was
- * possible (if @exact), or a negative errno
+ * Returns: 0 on success, 1 if was rounded up (if !@...ct), -EDOM if setting
+ * failed due to the exact waveform not being possible (if @exact), or a
+ * different negative errno on failure.
  * Context: May sleep.
  */
 int pwm_set_waveform_might_sleep(struct pwm_device *pwm,
@@ -440,6 +441,16 @@ int pwm_set_waveform_might_sleep(struct pwm_device *pwm,
 		err = __pwm_set_waveform(pwm, wf, exact);
 	}
 
+	/*
+	 * map err == 1 to -EDOM for exact requests. Also make sure that -EDOM is
+	 * only returned in exactly that case. Note that __pwm_set_waveform()
+	 * should never return -EDOM which justifies the unlikely().
+	 */
+	if (unlikely(err == -EDOM))
+		err = -EINVAL;
+	else if (exact && err == 1)
+		err = -EDOM;
+
 	return err;
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pwm_set_waveform_might_sleep);
-- 
2.47.2