During several error paths in the function
regulator_set_voltage_unlocked() the value of 'ret' can take on negative
error values. However, in calls that go through the 'goto out' statement,
this return value is lost and return 0 is used instead, indicating a
'pass'.
There are several cases where this function should legitimately return a
fail instead of a pass: one such case includes constraints check during
voltage selection in the call to regulator_check_voltage(), which can
have -EINVAL for the case when an unsupported voltage is incorrectly
requested. In that case, -22 is expected as the return value, not 0.
Fixes: 9243a195be7a ("regulator: core: Change voltage setting path")
Cc: stable <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Steve Twiss <[email protected]>
---
drivers/regulator/core.c | 11 ++++-------
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/regulator/core.c b/drivers/regulator/core.c
index 68473d0..968dcd9 100644
--- a/drivers/regulator/core.c
+++ b/drivers/regulator/core.c
@@ -3322,15 +3322,12 @@ static int regulator_set_voltage_unlocked(struct regulator *regulator,
/* for not coupled regulators this will just set the voltage */
ret = regulator_balance_voltage(rdev, state);
- if (ret < 0)
- goto out2;
+ if (ret < 0) {
+ voltage->min_uV = old_min_uV;
+ voltage->max_uV = old_max_uV;
+ }
out:
- return 0;
-out2:
- voltage->min_uV = old_min_uV;
- voltage->max_uV = old_max_uV;
-
return ret;
}
--
1.9.3
18.03.2019 19:17, Steve Twiss пишет:
> During several error paths in the function
> regulator_set_voltage_unlocked() the value of 'ret' can take on negative
> error values. However, in calls that go through the 'goto out' statement,
> this return value is lost and return 0 is used instead, indicating a
> 'pass'.
>
> There are several cases where this function should legitimately return a
> fail instead of a pass: one such case includes constraints check during
> voltage selection in the call to regulator_check_voltage(), which can
> have -EINVAL for the case when an unsupported voltage is incorrectly
> requested. In that case, -22 is expected as the return value, not 0.
>
> Fixes: 9243a195be7a ("regulator: core: Change voltage setting path")
> Cc: stable <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Steve Twiss <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/regulator/core.c | 11 ++++-------
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/regulator/core.c b/drivers/regulator/core.c
> index 68473d0..968dcd9 100644
> --- a/drivers/regulator/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/regulator/core.c
> @@ -3322,15 +3322,12 @@ static int regulator_set_voltage_unlocked(struct regulator *regulator,
>
> /* for not coupled regulators this will just set the voltage */
> ret = regulator_balance_voltage(rdev, state);
> - if (ret < 0)
> - goto out2;
> + if (ret < 0) {
> + voltage->min_uV = old_min_uV;
> + voltage->max_uV = old_max_uV;
> + }
>
> out:
> - return 0;
> -out2:
> - voltage->min_uV = old_min_uV;
> - voltage->max_uV = old_max_uV;
> -
> return ret;
> }
>
>
Reviewed-by: Dmitry Osipenko <[email protected]>
On 18 March 2019 16:41, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] regulator: core: fix error path for
> regulator_set_voltage_unlocked
[...]
> Reviewed-by: Dmitry Osipenko <[email protected]>
Thanks Dmitry.
Regards,
Steve