On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 06:30:32 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > Hi Jean, > > On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 12:22:29PM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote: > > Hi Peter, > > > > On Mon, 29 Oct 2012 21:58:47 +0100, Peter Hüwe wrote: > > > FYI, there are new smatch warnings show up in > > > > > > tree: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next master > > > head: 8243aafc4f54244984d7ea707265e98810a3a066 > > > commit: 0110e1dd583ee412ccde1ba027dced6b828fb466 hwmon: (w83627ehf) Add support for suspend > > > date: 32 hours ago > > > :::::: branch date: 3 hours ago > > > :::::: commit date: 32 hours ago > > > > > > drivers/hwmon/w83627ehf.c:911 w83627ehf_update_device() error: buffer overflow 'W83627EHF_REG_TEMP_OFFSET' 3 <= 8 > > > drivers/hwmon/w83627ehf.c:909 w83627ehf_update_device() error: buffer overflow 'data->temp_offset' 3 <= 8 > > > + drivers/hwmon/w83627ehf.c:2672 w83627ehf_resume() error: buffer overflow 'W83627EHF_REG_TEMP_OFFSET' 3 <= 8 > > > + drivers/hwmon/w83627ehf.c:2673 w83627ehf_resume() error: buffer overflow 'data->temp_offset' 3 <= 8 > > > > > > git remote update next > > > git checkout 0110e1dd583ee412ccde1ba027dced6b828fb466 > > > vim +2672 drivers/hwmon/w83627ehf.c > > > > > > 0110e1dd Jean Delvare 2012-10-25 2666 data->temp_max[i]); > > > 0110e1dd Jean Delvare 2012-10-25 2667 if (data->reg_temp_hyst[i]) > > > 0110e1dd Jean Delvare 2012-10-25 2668 w83627ehf_write_temp(data, data->reg_temp_hyst[i], > > > 0110e1dd Jean Delvare 2012-10-25 2669 data->temp_max_hyst[i]); > > > 0110e1dd Jean Delvare 2012-10-25 2670 if (data->have_temp_offset & (1 << i)) > > > 0110e1dd Jean Delvare 2012-10-25 2671 w83627ehf_write_value(data, > > > 0110e1dd Jean Delvare 2012-10-25 @2672 W83627EHF_REG_TEMP_OFFSET[i], > > > 0110e1dd Jean Delvare 2012-10-25 @2673 data->temp_offset[i]); > > > 0110e1dd Jean Delvare 2012-10-25 2674 } > > > 0110e1dd Jean Delvare 2012-10-25 2675 > > > 0110e1dd Jean Delvare 2012-10-25 2676 /* Restore other settings */ > > > > > > I checked it and it seems valid. > > > > Actually this is a false positive, only the lower 3 bits of > > data->have_temp_offset can be set so the write is never attempted with > > i >= 3. However this isn't something a static code analyzer can easily > > figure out, so it would be better and safer to adjust the code to make > > it more obvious. I'll send a patch. > > If you really want to patch it, there are more places like that; pretty much > every loop around the temperature registers is affected. I marked the others > as false positive quite some time ago. Marked how? -- Jean Delvare _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
