Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <32f42513-0c55-042e-2530-c58d980a9ce0@linaro.org>
Date:   Tue, 8 Nov 2022 10:39:48 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.4.2
Subject: Re: Coverity: gpmc_is_valid_waitpin(): Control flow issues
Content-Language: en-US
To:     "Niedermayr, BENEDIKT" <benedikt.niedermayr@siemens.com>,
        "rogerq@kernel.org" <rogerq@kernel.org>,
        "keescook@chromium.org" <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc:     "gustavo@embeddedor.com" <gustavo@embeddedor.com>,
        "tony@atomide.com" <tony@atomide.com>,
        "linux-next@vger.kernel.org" <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org" <linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org>
References: <202211041233.4D45359E7@keescook>
 <7cdf3d14-3f1b-7cd4-e8b9-e94b5359bf82@kernel.org>
 <e4e4c4f0-782b-9f89-d7a2-859c7759ca66@kernel.org>
 <b18cddde778ada5030f6a80308854cf9c0dc4d23.camel@siemens.com>
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
In-Reply-To: <b18cddde778ada5030f6a80308854cf9c0dc4d23.camel@siemens.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 08/11/2022 09:02, Niedermayr, BENEDIKT wrote:
> On Mon, 2022-11-07 at 10:56 +0200, Roger Quadros wrote:
>>
>> On 07/11/2022 10:53, Roger Quadros wrote:
>>> Hi Benedikt,
>>>
>>> On 04/11/2022 21:33, coverity-bot wrote:
>>>> Hello!
>>>>
>>>> This is an experimental semi-automated report about issues detected by
>>>> Coverity from a scan of next-20221104 as part of the linux-next scan project:
>>>> https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fscan.coverity.com%2Fprojects%2Flinux-next-weekly-scan&amp;data=05%7C01%7Cbenedikt.niedermayr%40siemens.com%7C1a25cc8704524f24224108dac09dfab7%7C38ae3bcd95794fd4addab42e1495d55a%7C1%7C0%7C638034081994087461%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&amp;sdata=W1KlBKg9nwEDfFAbqW6Jw7v1d46HQLj8RX8wlZ9RHyc%3D&amp;reserved=0
>>>>
>>>> You're getting this email because you were associated with the identified
>>>> lines of code (noted below) that were touched by commits:
>>>>
>>>>   Wed Nov 2 10:02:39 2022 -0400
>>>>     89aed3cd5cb9 ("memory: omap-gpmc: wait pin additions")
>>>>
>>>> Coverity reported the following:
>>>>
>>>> *** CID 1527139:  Control flow issues  (NO_EFFECT)
>>>> drivers/memory/omap-gpmc.c:1048 in gpmc_is_valid_waitpin()
>>>> 1042     	spin_unlock(&gpmc_mem_lock);
>>>> 1043     }
>>>> 1044     EXPORT_SYMBOL(gpmc_cs_free);
>>>> 1045
>>>> 1046     static bool gpmc_is_valid_waitpin(u32 waitpin)
>>>
>>> We will need to change this waitpin argument to int.
>>> In addition we will also need to change
>>> struct gpmc_waitpin->pin and struct gpmc_setting->wait_pin
>>> to int as in the code we are relying on GPMC_WAITPIN_INVALID logic which is -1.
>>
>> Another alternative with less churn is to leave them as u32
>> but make GPMC_WAITPIN_INVALID set to a large positive number.
> Ok, I will fix that. 
> Do I need to send a new fix-patch on top the current patch series? 
> Or should I just send only the bugfix-patch for the coverity-bot? 
>

A bugfix patch on current next is ok.

Best regards,
Krzysztof