Smatch reports:
drivers/iio/adc/mxs-lradc-adc.c:766 mxs_lradc_adc_probe() warn:
missing unwind goto?
the order of three init operation:
1.mxs_lradc_adc_trigger_init
2.iio_triggered_buffer_setup
3.mxs_lradc_adc_hw_init
thus, the order of three cleanup operation should be:
1.mxs_lradc_adc_hw_stop
2.iio_triggered_buffer_cleanup
3.mxs_lradc_adc_trigger_remove
we exchange the order of two cleanup operations,
introducing the following differences:
1.if mxs_lradc_adc_trigger_init fails, returns directly;
2.if trigger_init succeeds but iio_triggered_buffer_setup fails,
goto err_trig and remove the trigger.
In addition, we also reorder the unwind that goes on in the
remove() callback to match the new ordering.
Fixes: 6dd112b9f85e ("iio: adc: mxs-lradc: Add support for ADC driver")
Signed-off-by: Jiakai Luo <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Dongliang Mu <[email protected]>
---
The issue is found by static analysis and remains untested.
---
drivers/iio/adc/mxs-lradc-adc.c | 10 +++++-----
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/iio/adc/mxs-lradc-adc.c b/drivers/iio/adc/mxs-lradc-adc.c
index bca79a93cbe4..85882509b7d9 100644
--- a/drivers/iio/adc/mxs-lradc-adc.c
+++ b/drivers/iio/adc/mxs-lradc-adc.c
@@ -757,13 +757,13 @@ static int mxs_lradc_adc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
ret = mxs_lradc_adc_trigger_init(iio);
if (ret)
- goto err_trig;
+ return ret;
ret = iio_triggered_buffer_setup(iio, &iio_pollfunc_store_time,
&mxs_lradc_adc_trigger_handler,
&mxs_lradc_adc_buffer_ops);
if (ret)
- return ret;
+ goto err_trig;
adc->vref_mv = mxs_lradc_adc_vref_mv[lradc->soc];
@@ -801,9 +801,9 @@ static int mxs_lradc_adc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
err_dev:
mxs_lradc_adc_hw_stop(adc);
- mxs_lradc_adc_trigger_remove(iio);
-err_trig:
iio_triggered_buffer_cleanup(iio);
+err_trig:
+ mxs_lradc_adc_trigger_remove(iio);
return ret;
}
@@ -814,8 +814,8 @@ static int mxs_lradc_adc_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
iio_device_unregister(iio);
mxs_lradc_adc_hw_stop(adc);
- mxs_lradc_adc_trigger_remove(iio);
iio_triggered_buffer_cleanup(iio);
+ mxs_lradc_adc_trigger_remove(iio);
return 0;
}
--
2.17.1
On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 19:47:45 -0700
Jiakai Luo <[email protected]> wrote:
> Smatch reports:
> drivers/iio/adc/mxs-lradc-adc.c:766 mxs_lradc_adc_probe() warn:
> missing unwind goto?
>
> the order of three init operation:
> 1.mxs_lradc_adc_trigger_init
> 2.iio_triggered_buffer_setup
> 3.mxs_lradc_adc_hw_init
>
> thus, the order of three cleanup operation should be:
> 1.mxs_lradc_adc_hw_stop
> 2.iio_triggered_buffer_cleanup
> 3.mxs_lradc_adc_trigger_remove
>
> we exchange the order of two cleanup operations,
> introducing the following differences:
> 1.if mxs_lradc_adc_trigger_init fails, returns directly;
> 2.if trigger_init succeeds but iio_triggered_buffer_setup fails,
> goto err_trig and remove the trigger.
>
> In addition, we also reorder the unwind that goes on in the
> remove() callback to match the new ordering.
>
> Fixes: 6dd112b9f85e ("iio: adc: mxs-lradc: Add support for ADC driver")
> Signed-off-by: Jiakai Luo <[email protected]>
> Reviewed-by: Dongliang Mu <[email protected]>
If resending please state why. I'm guessing on this occasion it was because
you realised a fresh thread is expected for a new patch.
Also, even if you are just amending the patch description, please increase
the version number so that we can be sure we are looking at latest version.
I already picked it from the earlier posting and this appears unchanged
so all's well that ends well!
Jonathan
> ---
> The issue is found by static analysis and remains untested.
> ---
> drivers/iio/adc/mxs-lradc-adc.c | 10 +++++-----
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/iio/adc/mxs-lradc-adc.c b/drivers/iio/adc/mxs-lradc-adc.c
> index bca79a93cbe4..85882509b7d9 100644
> --- a/drivers/iio/adc/mxs-lradc-adc.c
> +++ b/drivers/iio/adc/mxs-lradc-adc.c
> @@ -757,13 +757,13 @@ static int mxs_lradc_adc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>
> ret = mxs_lradc_adc_trigger_init(iio);
> if (ret)
> - goto err_trig;
> + return ret;
>
> ret = iio_triggered_buffer_setup(iio, &iio_pollfunc_store_time,
> &mxs_lradc_adc_trigger_handler,
> &mxs_lradc_adc_buffer_ops);
> if (ret)
> - return ret;
> + goto err_trig;
>
> adc->vref_mv = mxs_lradc_adc_vref_mv[lradc->soc];
>
> @@ -801,9 +801,9 @@ static int mxs_lradc_adc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>
> err_dev:
> mxs_lradc_adc_hw_stop(adc);
> - mxs_lradc_adc_trigger_remove(iio);
> -err_trig:
> iio_triggered_buffer_cleanup(iio);
> +err_trig:
> + mxs_lradc_adc_trigger_remove(iio);
> return ret;
> }
>
> @@ -814,8 +814,8 @@ static int mxs_lradc_adc_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
>
> iio_device_unregister(iio);
> mxs_lradc_adc_hw_stop(adc);
> - mxs_lradc_adc_trigger_remove(iio);
> iio_triggered_buffer_cleanup(iio);
> + mxs_lradc_adc_trigger_remove(iio);
>
> return 0;
> }
On 2023/4/23 18:50, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 19:47:45 -0700
> Jiakai Luo <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Smatch reports:
>> drivers/iio/adc/mxs-lradc-adc.c:766 mxs_lradc_adc_probe() warn:
>> missing unwind goto?
>>
>> the order of three init operation:
>> 1.mxs_lradc_adc_trigger_init
>> 2.iio_triggered_buffer_setup
>> 3.mxs_lradc_adc_hw_init
>>
>> thus, the order of three cleanup operation should be:
>> 1.mxs_lradc_adc_hw_stop
>> 2.iio_triggered_buffer_cleanup
>> 3.mxs_lradc_adc_trigger_remove
>>
>> we exchange the order of two cleanup operations,
>> introducing the following differences:
>> 1.if mxs_lradc_adc_trigger_init fails, returns directly;
>> 2.if trigger_init succeeds but iio_triggered_buffer_setup fails,
>> goto err_trig and remove the trigger.
>>
>> In addition, we also reorder the unwind that goes on in the
>> remove() callback to match the new ordering.
>>
>> Fixes: 6dd112b9f85e ("iio: adc: mxs-lradc: Add support for ADC driver")
>> Signed-off-by: Jiakai Luo <[email protected]>
>> Reviewed-by: Dongliang Mu <[email protected]>
> If resending please state why. I'm guessing on this occasion it was because
> you realised a fresh thread is expected for a new patch.
>
> Also, even if you are just amending the patch description, please increase
> the version number so that we can be sure we are looking at latest version.
>
> I already picked it from the earlier posting and this appears unchanged
> so all's well that ends well!
>
> Jonathan
Hi JC,
Jiakai originally would like to send a reminder about his patch, but
mistakenly sent a v2 version.
Please ignore this v2 version since this version is the same with v1
version.
Sorry for the mistake.
>
>> ---
>> The issue is found by static analysis and remains untested.
>> ---
>> drivers/iio/adc/mxs-lradc-adc.c | 10 +++++-----
>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/iio/adc/mxs-lradc-adc.c b/drivers/iio/adc/mxs-lradc-adc.c
>> index bca79a93cbe4..85882509b7d9 100644
>> --- a/drivers/iio/adc/mxs-lradc-adc.c
>> +++ b/drivers/iio/adc/mxs-lradc-adc.c
>> @@ -757,13 +757,13 @@ static int mxs_lradc_adc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>
>> ret = mxs_lradc_adc_trigger_init(iio);
>> if (ret)
>> - goto err_trig;
>> + return ret;
>>
>> ret = iio_triggered_buffer_setup(iio, &iio_pollfunc_store_time,
>> &mxs_lradc_adc_trigger_handler,
>> &mxs_lradc_adc_buffer_ops);
>> if (ret)
>> - return ret;
>> + goto err_trig;
>>
>> adc->vref_mv = mxs_lradc_adc_vref_mv[lradc->soc];
>>
>> @@ -801,9 +801,9 @@ static int mxs_lradc_adc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>
>> err_dev:
>> mxs_lradc_adc_hw_stop(adc);
>> - mxs_lradc_adc_trigger_remove(iio);
>> -err_trig:
>> iio_triggered_buffer_cleanup(iio);
>> +err_trig:
>> + mxs_lradc_adc_trigger_remove(iio);
>> return ret;
>> }
>>
>> @@ -814,8 +814,8 @@ static int mxs_lradc_adc_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>
>> iio_device_unregister(iio);
>> mxs_lradc_adc_hw_stop(adc);
>> - mxs_lradc_adc_trigger_remove(iio);
>> iio_triggered_buffer_cleanup(iio);
>> + mxs_lradc_adc_trigger_remove(iio);
>>
>> return 0;
>> }