Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1400260 > unrolled thread

[PATCH] mfd: max77620: Fix FPS switch statements

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

Contents

  [PATCH] mfd: max77620: Fix FPS switch statements Rhyland Klein <rklein@nvidia.com> - 2016-05-12 19:50 +0200
    Re: [PATCH] mfd: max77620: Fix FPS switch statements Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@nvidia.com> - 2016-05-12 20:10 +0200
      Re: [PATCH] mfd: max77620: Fix FPS switch statements Rhyland Klein <rklein@nvidia.com> - 2016-05-27 22:40 +0200
        Re: [PATCH] mfd: max77620: Fix FPS switch statements Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> - 2016-05-31 09:40 +0200

#1400260 — [PATCH] mfd: max77620: Fix FPS switch statements

When configuring FPS during probe, assuming a DT node is present for
FPS, the code can run into a problem with the switch statements in
max77620_config_fps() and max77620_get_fps_period_reg_value(). Namely,
in the case of chip->chip_id == MAX77620, it will set
fps_[mix|max]_period but then fall through to the default switch case
and return -EINVAL. Returning this from max77620_config_fps() will
cause probe to fail.

Signed-off-by: Rhyland Klein <rklein@nvidia.com>
---
 drivers/mfd/max77620.c | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/mfd/max77620.c b/drivers/mfd/max77620.c
index 199d261990be..f32fbb8e8129 100644
--- a/drivers/mfd/max77620.c
+++ b/drivers/mfd/max77620.c
@@ -203,6 +203,7 @@ static int max77620_get_fps_period_reg_value(struct max77620_chip *chip,
 		break;
 	case MAX77620:
 		fps_min_period = MAX77620_FPS_PERIOD_MIN_US;
+		break;
 	default:
 		return -EINVAL;
 	}
@@ -236,6 +237,7 @@ static int max77620_config_fps(struct max77620_chip *chip,
 		break;
 	case MAX77620:
 		fps_max_period = MAX77620_FPS_PERIOD_MAX_US;
+		break;
 	default:
 		return -EINVAL;
 	}
-- 
1.9.1

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1400266

On Thursday 12 May 2016 11:15 PM, Rhyland Klein wrote:
> When configuring FPS during probe, assuming a DT node is present for
> FPS, the code can run into a problem with the switch statements in
> max77620_config_fps() and max77620_get_fps_period_reg_value(). Namely,
> in the case of chip->chip_id == MAX77620, it will set
> fps_[mix|max]_period but then fall through to the default switch case
> and return -EINVAL. Returning this from max77620_config_fps() will
> cause probe to fail.
>

Thanks for fixes.
Missed when converting if-else to switch.

Reviewed-by: Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@nvidia.com>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1408296

On 5/12/2016 1:52 PM, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
> 
> On Thursday 12 May 2016 11:15 PM, Rhyland Klein wrote:
>> When configuring FPS during probe, assuming a DT node is present for
>> FPS, the code can run into a problem with the switch statements in
>> max77620_config_fps() and max77620_get_fps_period_reg_value(). Namely,
>> in the case of chip->chip_id == MAX77620, it will set
>> fps_[mix|max]_period but then fall through to the default switch case
>> and return -EINVAL. Returning this from max77620_config_fps() will
>> cause probe to fail.
>>
> 
> Thanks for fixes.
> Missed when converting if-else to switch.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@nvidia.com>
> 

Lee, I noticed this hasn't been merged yet, but without it platforms
using the max77620 can easily (if it has FPS nodes) fail to probe. Is
there anything blocking it?

-rhyland

-- 
nvpublic

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1409937

On Fri, 27 May 2016, Rhyland Klein wrote:

> On 5/12/2016 1:52 PM, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
> > 
> > On Thursday 12 May 2016 11:15 PM, Rhyland Klein wrote:
> >> When configuring FPS during probe, assuming a DT node is present for
> >> FPS, the code can run into a problem with the switch statements in
> >> max77620_config_fps() and max77620_get_fps_period_reg_value(). Namely,
> >> in the case of chip->chip_id == MAX77620, it will set
> >> fps_[mix|max]_period but then fall through to the default switch case
> >> and return -EINVAL. Returning this from max77620_config_fps() will
> >> cause probe to fail.
> >>
> > 
> > Thanks for fixes.
> > Missed when converting if-else to switch.
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@nvidia.com>
> > 
> 
> Lee, I noticed this hasn't been merged yet, but without it platforms
> using the max77620 can easily (if it has FPS nodes) fail to probe. Is
> there anything blocking it?

Yes, it was sent too late in the cycle.

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web