On Fri, 24 Jul 2009 16:53:49 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Jul 2009 09:12:12 +0200
> Jean Delvare <khali at linux-fr.org> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 23 Jul 2009 19:34:58 +0200, Roel Kluin wrote:
> > > pwm_config is only 3 bytes - pwm_config[3] is out of range.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin <roel.kluin at gmail.com>
> > > ---
> > > Credits to Parfait and Nathan Keynes,
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/dme1737.c b/drivers/hwmon/dme1737.c
> > > index 3df202a..57e8ed4 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/hwmon/dme1737.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/hwmon/dme1737.c
> > > @@ -1134,7 +1134,7 @@ static ssize_t show_pwm(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr,
> > > res = PWM_FREQ_FROM_REG(data->pwm_freq[ix]);
> > > break;
> > > case SYS_PWM_ENABLE:
> > > - if (ix > 3) {
> > > + if (ix >= 3) {
> > > res = 1; /* pwm[5-6] hard-wired to manual mode */
> > > } else {
> > > res = PWM_EN_FROM_REG(data->pwm_config[ix]);
> >
> > This code path is never called with ix == 3 (the device has no PWM4
> > output) so it doesn't make any difference in practice.
> >
>
> This possible bug was, I believe, detected by a static code scanner
> called "Parfait".
>
> Hopefully people will continue to run Parfait against the kernel for
> years to come. It would be unfortunate if code sites such as this were
> to pop up in their reports again and again, so there is value in making
> the parfait warning go away, even if it is a cant-happen thing.
Feel free to push the patch upstream yourself then. But please make
sure the description is clear enough that it doesn't fix any actual bug.
--
Jean Delvare
