linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] iio: imu: adis16550: rework clock range test

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: <aGVJPRmn1-HUBb40@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2025 17:59:09 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>
To: David Lechner <dlechner@...libre.com>
Cc: Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
	Michael Hennerich <Michael.Hennerich@...log.com>,
	Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
	Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@...log.com>,
	Robert Budai <robert.budai@...log.com>,
	Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iio: imu: adis16550: rework clock range test

On Wed, Jul 02, 2025 at 05:53:57PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 02, 2025 at 09:27:45AM -0500, David Lechner wrote:
> > Rework the clock rate range test to test if sync_mode_data != NULL
> > instead of testing if the for loop index variable. This makes it easier
> > for static analyzers to see that we aren't using an uninitialized
> > sync_mode_data [1].
> 
> But at the same time it makes it not to be the usual pattern.,,

Reading the static analyser output I think the first hunk is only what we need,
but this is still false positive and it's problem of that static
analyser. Have you filed a bug there? (My point is that modifying the code for
the advantage of false positives of some static analyser is wrong road to go
in my opinion.)

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko