On 3/20/23 12:08, David Rheinsberg wrote:
> Hi
>
> On Mon, 20 Mar 2023 at 16:34, Nikita Zhandarovich
> <n.zhandarovich@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> wiimote_cmd_wait() in wiimod_battery_get_property() may signal that the
>> task of getting specific battery property was interrupted or timed out.
>> There is no need to do any further computation in such cases, so just
>> return the error.
>>
>> Found by Linux Verification Center (linuxtesting.org) with static
>> analysis tool SVACE.
>>
>> Fixes: dcf392313817 ("HID: wiimote: convert BATTERY to module")
>> Signed-off-by: Nikita Zhandarovich <n.zhandarovich@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/hid/hid-wiimote-modules.c | 4 +++-
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/hid/hid-wiimote-modules.c b/drivers/hid/hid-wiimote-modules.c
>> index dbccdfa63916..9755718d9856 100644
>> --- a/drivers/hid/hid-wiimote-modules.c
>> +++ b/drivers/hid/hid-wiimote-modules.c
>> @@ -220,8 +220,10 @@ static int wiimod_battery_get_property(struct power_supply *psy,
>> wiiproto_req_status(wdata);
>> spin_unlock_irqrestore(&wdata->state.lock, flags);
>>
>> - wiimote_cmd_wait(wdata);
>> + ret = wiimote_cmd_wait(wdata);
>> wiimote_cmd_release(wdata);
>> + if (ret)
>> + return ret;
>
> The current code returns cached battery-information in case a
> synchronous update did not succeed. Battery information is likely
> updated regularly, anyway, so the synchronous update is usually not
> required.
>
> I don't think bailing out and returning the error to the caller is
> required or gains us anything but more complexity. Or am I missing
> something here?
>
> Thanks
> David
Hi. I think you are right, my change is not that essential to begin with
and there is no urgency to patch this.
Thanks for your patience,
Nikita
