On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 06:26:04PM +0100, Colin Ian King wrote:
> On 15/05/2020 18:21, Alan Stern wrote:
> > On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 05:54:53PM +0100, Colin King wrote:
> >> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>
> >> The comparison of hcd->irq to less than zero for an error check will
> >> never be true because hcd->irq is an unsigned int. Fix this by
> >> assigning the int retval to the return of platform_get_irq and checking
> >> this for the -ve error condition and assigning hcd->irq to retval.
> >>
> >> Addresses-Coverity: ("Unsigned compared against 0")
> >> Fixes: c856b4b0fdb5 ("USB: EHCI: ehci-mv: fix error handling in mv_ehci_probe()")
> >> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >
> > Thanks to Coverity for spotting this. Any reason why it didn't spot
> > exactly the same mistake in the ohci-da8xx.c driver?
>
> No idea, it is curious that it can spot one error but miss another.
> Sometimes I see these issues on the next scan, so it maybe the database
> diff'ing is awry.
>
> >
> > Also, why wasn't the patch CC'ed for the stable series?
>
> My bad on that. Human error
Actually the question itself was my mistake. I didn't notice that your
patch was a fix to something that was just merged and hadn't been CC'ed
to stable.
Alan Stern
