Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
In-Reply-To: <E490CD805F7529488761C40FD9D26EF12AB29F8A@dggemm507-mbx.china.huawei.com>
References: <1553954142-65515-1-git-send-email-nixiaoming@huawei.com> <155606042712.15276.6873845293187802041@swboyd.mtv.corp.google.com> <E490CD805F7529488761C40FD9D26EF12AB29F8A@dggemm507-mbx.china.huawei.com>
Cc:     "linux-clk@vger.kernel.org" <linux-clk@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
From:   Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v3 2/2] clk:mmp: clk-mix.c fix divide-by-zero
To:     "chao.xie@marvell.com" <chao.xie@marvell.com>,
        "jbrunet@baylibre.com" <jbrunet@baylibre.com>,
        "mojha@codeaurora.org" <mojha@codeaurora.org>,
        "mturquette@baylibre.com" <mturquette@baylibre.com>,
        "sboyd@codeaurora.org" <sboyd@codeaurora.org>,
        "soren.brinkmann@xilinx.com" <soren.brinkmann@xilinx.com>,
        Nixiaoming <nixiaoming@huawei.com>
Message-ID: <155613934508.15276.10077721853967398026@swboyd.mtv.corp.google.com>
User-Agent: alot/0.8
Date:   Wed, 24 Apr 2019 13:55:45 -0700
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Quoting Nixiaoming (2019-04-24 08:34:54)
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 7:00 AM Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org> wrote:
> >Quoting nixiaoming (2019-03-30 06:55:42)
> >> The _get_div() function has a branch with a return value of 0
> >> Add a check on the return value of _get_div() to avoid divide-by-zero
> >>=20
> >
> >Are you seeing this in practice? Or just trying to avoid a div-by-zero
> >case that you've found from inspection?=20
> >
> This potential bug is found by code inspection.
> _get_div() is defined as a static function which is only refered twice=20
> in drivers/clk/mmp/clk-mix.c. In both cases the return value of _get_div()
>  is used as divider without any check.
>  If _get_div() never returns 0, then the branch returning 0 is dead code,
> or the return value should be check to avoid dividing by zero error.=20
>=20

Ok. If it's found by code inspection then I'd rather wait until someone
can confirm what the behavior should be when _get_div() returns 0. Is it
an error case that never happens or does the hardware support 0 as a
divider value meaning "bypass"? I'd like to understand that before
patching up a potential div-by-zero case and not knowing what it means.