On Sat, May 04, 2024 at 10:24:47PM +0200, Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
> Hi Dan,
>
> On Sat, May 04, 2024 at 02:24:21PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > [ This patch is 19 years old now... :P Sorry! - dan ]
> >
> > Commit 2add87a95068 ("[PATCH] dvb: b2c2/flexcop driver refactoring
> > part 2: add modular Flexcop driver") from May 16, 2005 (linux-next),
> > leads to the following Smatch static checker warning:
>
> I think the patches were from Patrick and misattributed because
> I was too stupid to operate git correctly at the time.
>
> > drivers/media/usb/b2c2/flexcop-usb.c:199 flexcop_usb_memory_req()
> > warn: iterator 'i' not incremented
>
> > --> 199 for (i = 0; i < len;) {
> >
> > No i++.
>
> > 208 ret = flexcop_usb_v8_memory_req(fc_usb, req,
> > 209 page_start + (addr / V8_MEMORY_PAGE_SIZE),
> > 210 (addr & V8_MEMORY_PAGE_MASK) |
> > 211 (V8_MEMORY_EXTENDED*extended),
> > 212 &buf[i], pagechunk);
> > ^^^^^^^^
> > I think adding an i++ doesn't make sense. Are we really writing a byte
> > at a time?
> C>
> > 213
> > 214 if (ret < 0)
> > 215 return ret;
> > 216 addr += pagechunk;
> > 217 len -= pagechunk;
> > 218 }
>
> The loop is weird, but I guess it worked because the len -= pagechunk
> would have terminated the loop and supposedly there was only one
> iteration ever. I doubt anyone has hardware to test it, so don't
> change it. Well, I certainly won't touch it, you can do it if you want.
Nah. It's fine. If you don't know, then I for sure don't know.
regards,
dan carpenter
