Can you retitle this to state "overflow" rather than just "wrong"?
That's more descriptive.
E.g "Fix clockrate overflow for high parent frequencies"
On 2023-07-20 14:03:04, Devi Priya wrote:
> If the parent clock rate is greater than unsigned long max/2 then
> integer overflow happens when calculating the clock rate on 32-bit systems.
> As RCG2 uses half integer dividers, the clock rate is first being
> multiplied by 2 which will overflow the unsigned long max value. So, use
> unsigned long long for rate computations to avoid overflow.
>
> Signed-off-by: Devi Priya <quic_devipriy@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/clk/qcom/clk-rcg2.c | 12 ++++++------
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-rcg2.c b/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-rcg2.c
> index e22baf3a7112..42d00b134975 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-rcg2.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-rcg2.c
> @@ -156,18 +156,18 @@ static int clk_rcg2_set_parent(struct clk_hw *hw, u8 index)
> * hid_div n
> */
> static unsigned long
> -calc_rate(unsigned long rate, u32 m, u32 n, u32 mode, u32 hid_div)
> +calc_rate(unsigned long parent_rate, u32 m, u32 n, u32 mode, u32 hid_div)
> {
> + u64 rate = parent_rate;
> +
> if (hid_div) {
> rate *= 2;
> - rate /= hid_div + 1;
> + do_div(rate, hid_div + 1);
I'm pretty sure mult_frac() could have solved this as well, without
temporarily going to u64?
mult_frac(rate, 2, hid_div + 1)
> }
>
> if (mode) {
> - u64 tmp = rate;
> - tmp *= m;
> - do_div(tmp, n);
> - rate = tmp;
> + rate *= m;
> + do_div(rate, n);
mult_frac(rate, m, n)
Or am I totally wrong?
- Marijn
> }
>
> return rate;
> --
> 2.17.1
>
