The code here treats very large values of "limit" as less than
MAX_POWER_RATE because of the cast to int. We should do the compare
as u32 instead.
Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <[email protected]>
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/hw.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/hw.c
index e0c8549..f9abbb7 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/hw.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/hw.c
@@ -2526,7 +2526,7 @@ void ath9k_hw_set_txpowerlimit(struct ath_hw *ah, u32 limit, bool test)
struct ath9k_channel *chan = ah->curchan;
struct ieee80211_channel *channel = chan->chan;
- reg->power_limit = min_t(int, limit, MAX_RATE_POWER);
+ reg->power_limit = min_t(u32, limit, MAX_RATE_POWER);
if (test)
channel->max_power = MAX_RATE_POWER / 2;
On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 10:28:23 +0300
Dan Carpenter <[email protected]> wrote:
> The code here treats very large values of "limit" as less than
> MAX_POWER_RATE because of the cast to int. We should do the compare
> as u32 instead.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Pavel Roskin <[email protected]>
I don't think it can actually happen. ath9k_hw_set_txpowerlimit() is
called twice. In one case, limit is MAX_RATE_POWER, in another case,
it's an argument of type u16. Still, it's better not to have the code
that looks wrong.
ath9k_cmn_update_txpow() also has code that _looks_ wrong. *txpower is
not assigned a value if the new power happens to be equal to the
current one. Also, the second argument (cur_txpow) is not used.
Returning a value by a pointer seems unnecessary if the function returns
void. It could simply return the new tx power. I'll submit a patch
shortly.
--
Regards,
Pavel Roskin