lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Feb]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Intel: Skylake: Fix inconsistent IS_ERR and PTR_ERR
From
Date


On 2/21/20 8:41 AM, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Fri, 2020-02-21 at 18:11 +0800, Xu Wang wrote:
>> PTR_ERR should access the value just tested by IS_ERR.
>> In skl_clk_dev_probe(),it is inconsistent.
> []
>> diff --git a/sound/soc/intel/skylake/skl-ssp-clk.c b/sound/soc/intel/skylake/skl-ssp-clk.c
> []
>> @@ -384,7 +384,7 @@ static int skl_clk_dev_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> &clks[i], clk_pdata, i);
>>
>> if (IS_ERR(data->clk[data->avail_clk_cnt])) {
>> - ret = PTR_ERR(data->clk[data->avail_clk_cnt++]);
>> + ret = PTR_ERR(data->clk[data->avail_clk_cnt]);
>
> NAK.
>
> This is not inconsistent and you are removing the ++
> which is a post increment. Likely that is necessary.
>
> You could write the access and the increment as two
> separate statements if it confuses you.

Well to be fair the code is far from clear.

the post-increment is likely needed because of the error handling in
unregister_src_clk 1
data->clk[data->avail_clk_cnt] = register_skl_clk(dev,
&clks[i], clk_pdata, i);

if (IS_ERR(data->clk[data->avail_clk_cnt])) {
ret = PTR_ERR(data->clk[data->avail_clk_cnt++]);
goto err_unreg_skl_clk;
}
}

platform_set_drvdata(pdev, data);

return 0;

err_unreg_skl_clk:
unregister_src_clk(data);

static void unregister_src_clk(struct skl_clk_data *dclk)
{
while (dclk->avail_clk_cnt--)
clkdev_drop(dclk->clk[dclk->avail_clk_cnt]->lookup);
}

So the post-increment is cancelled in the while().

That said, the avail_clk_cnt field is never initialized or incremented
in normal usages so the code looks quite suspicious indeed.

gitk tells me this patch is likely the culprit:

6ee927f2f01466 ('ASoC: Intel: Skylake: Fix NULL ptr dereference when
unloading clk dev')

- data->clk[i] = register_skl_clk(dev, &clks[i], clk_pdata, i);
- if (IS_ERR(data->clk[i])) {
- ret = PTR_ERR(data->clk[i]);
+ data->clk[data->avail_clk_cnt] = register_skl_clk(dev,
+ &clks[i], clk_pdata, i);
+
+ if (IS_ERR(data->clk[data->avail_clk_cnt])) {
+ ret = PTR_ERR(data->clk[data->avail_clk_cnt++]);
goto err_unreg_skl_clk;
}
-
- data->avail_clk_cnt++;

That last removal is probably wrong. Cezary and Amadeusz, you may want
to look at this?

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-02-21 16:45    [W:0.066 / U:0.032 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site