On Thu, Apr 09, 2020 at 10:58:18AM +0200, Alexandre Bard wrote:
> Former code was iterating through all possible IDs whereas only a few
> per settings array are really available. Leading to several out of
> bounds readings.
>
> Line is now longer than 80 characters. But since it is a classic for
> loop I think it is better to keep it like this than splitting it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Bard <alexandre.bard@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c b/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c
> index 84d219ae6aee..be8882ff30eb 100644
> --- a/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c
> @@ -1350,7 +1350,7 @@ static int st_lsm6dsx_check_whoami(struct st_lsm6dsx_hw *hw, int id,
> int err, i, j, data;
>
> for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings); i++) {
> - for (j = 0; j < ST_LSM6DSX_MAX_ID; j++) {
> + for (j = 0; j < ARRAY_SIZE(st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings[i].id); j++) {
id in st_lsm6dsx_settings is declared as:
struct {
enum st_lsm6dsx_hw_id hw_id;
const char *name;
} id[ST_LSM6DSX_MAX_ID];
so it's always ST_LSM6DSX_MAX_ID long
(additional entries are just zero-initialized).
Isn't ARRAY_SIZE(st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings[i].id) == ST_LSM6DSX_MAX_ID
in this case?
> if (st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings[i].id[j].name &&
> id == st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings[i].id[j].hw_id)
> break;
> --
> 2.20.1
>
