linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1] spi: microchip-core-qspi: stop checking viability of op->max_freq in supports

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: <175650597222.396097.13617844393392701589.b4-ty@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2025 23:19:32 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: linux-spi@...r.kernel.org, Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>
Cc: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>, stable@...r.kernel.org, 
 Valentina Fernandez <valentina.fernandezalanis@...rochip.com>, 
 Daire McNamara <daire.mcnamara@...rochip.com>, 
 Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] spi: microchip-core-qspi: stop checking viability
 of op->max_freq in supports_op callback

On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 12:53:28 +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> In commit 13529647743d9 ("spi: microchip-core-qspi: Support per spi-mem
> operation frequency switches") the logic for checking the viability of
> op->max_freq in mchp_coreqspi_setup_clock() was copied into
> mchp_coreqspi_supports_op(). Unfortunately, op->max_freq is not valid
> when this function is called during probe but is instead zero.
> Accordingly, baud_rate_val is calculated to be INT_MAX due to division
> by zero, causing probe of the attached memory device to fail.
> 
> [...]

Applied to

   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/spi.git for-next

Thanks!

[1/1] spi: microchip-core-qspi: stop checking viability of op->max_freq in supports_op callback
      commit: 89e7353f522f5cf70cb48c01ce2dcdcb275b8022

All being well this means that it will be integrated into the linux-next
tree (usually sometime in the next 24 hours) and sent to Linus during
the next merge window (or sooner if it is a bug fix), however if
problems are discovered then the patch may be dropped or reverted.

You may get further e-mails resulting from automated or manual testing
and review of the tree, please engage with people reporting problems and
send followup patches addressing any issues that are reported if needed.

If any updates are required or you are submitting further changes they
should be sent as incremental updates against current git, existing
patches will not be replaced.

Please add any relevant lists and maintainers to the CCs when replying
to this mail.

Thanks,
Mark