[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20251002092456.11-1-alsp705@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2025 12:24:52 +0300
From: Alexandr Sapozhnkiov <alsp705@...il.com>
To: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>
Cc: Alexandr Sapozhnikov <alsp705@...il.com>,
linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
lvc-project@...uxtesting.org
Subject: [PATCH] rtc: fix error checking in wdt_disable()
From: Alexandr Sapozhnikov <alsp705@...il.com>
The i2c_transfer() function may return an error.
Ignoring errors returned by functions is bad practice.
Especially when these functions perform core functionality.
What's the point of continuing to call the same function
after an error is returned?
If the second function call succeeds, data corruption will occur.
Found by Linux Verification Center (linuxtesting.org) with SVACE.
Signed-off-by: Alexandr Sapozhnikov <alsp705@...il.com>
---
drivers/rtc/rtc-m41t80.c | 10 +++++-----
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-m41t80.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-m41t80.c
index 0013bff0447d..b24d09c57816 100644
--- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-m41t80.c
+++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-m41t80.c
@@ -677,11 +677,11 @@ static void wdt_disable(void)
};
i2c_data[0] = 0x09;
- i2c_transfer(save_client->adapter, msgs0, 2);
-
- i2c_data[0] = 0x09;
- i2c_data[1] = 0x00;
- i2c_transfer(save_client->adapter, msgs1, 1);
+ if (!i2c_transfer(save_client->adapter, msgs0, 2)) {
+ i2c_data[0] = 0x09;
+ i2c_data[1] = 0x00;
+ i2c_transfer(save_client->adapter, msgs1, 1);
+ }
}
/**
--
2.43.0
Powered by blists - more mailing lists