linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] clk: microchip: core: correct return value on *_get

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: <aTSwYHpdysScCnT4@redhat.com>
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2025 17:38:24 -0500
From: Brian Masney <bmasney@...hat.com>
To: Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea@...on.dev>
Cc: Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>, Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>,
	Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] clk: microchip: core: correct return value on
 *_get_parent()

On Sat, Dec 06, 2025 at 04:31:03PM +0200, Claudiu Beznea wrote:
> 
> 
> On 12/5/25 21:46, Brian Masney wrote:
> > roclk_get_parent() and sclk_get_parent() has the possibility of
> > returning -EINVAL, however the framework expects this call to always
> > succeed since the return value is unsigned.
> > 
> > If there is no parent map defined, then the current value programmed in
> > the hardware is used. Let's use that same value in the case where
> > -EINVAL is currently returned.
> > 
> > This index is only used by clk_core_get_parent_by_index(), and it
> > validates that it doesn't overflow the number of available parents.
> > 
> > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
> 
> I'm getting this from checkpatch:
> 
> Applying: clk: microchip: core: correct return value on *_get_parent()
> [Checking commit] 910546c58dc2 clk: microchip: core: correct return value
> on *_get_parent()
> [Checkpatch]      WARNING: Reported-by: should be immediately followed by
> Closes: with a URL to the report
> #17:
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
> Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>

That's a false positive from checkpatch. It doesn't like the two
Reported-by lines, with a single Closes. The warning goes away if I do
this:

Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/r/202512050233.R9hAWsJN-lkp@intel.com/
Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/r/202512050233.R9hAWsJN-lkp@intel.com/

> > Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>
> > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/r/202512050233.R9hAWsJN-lkp@intel.com/
> > Signed-off-by: Brian Masney <bmasney@...hat.com>
> 
> Other than the above:
> Reviewed-by: Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea@...on.dev>

Thanks!

Brian