On Thu, 5 Dec 2013 16:13:32 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 01:06:13PM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote: > > Hi Dan, > > > > On Thu, 5 Dec 2013 13:58:45 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > > It's not enough to just test if "rpm" is zero, the "rpm * div" operation > > > could overflow and that could also lead to a divide by zero. > > > > If you believe an overflow can happen (and indeed it can) then this > > isn't the way to handle it. Avoiding a divide by zero is certainly nice > > but properly handling the other overflow cases too would be better. > > > > In practice, this means for the vt8231 driver: > > > > if (rpm == 0 || rpm > 1310720) > > return 0; > > > > and for the lm78 and sis5595 drivers: > > > > if (rpm <= 0) > > return 255; > > if (rpm > 1350000) > > return 0; > > For these two are you sure the return value shouldn't be 1? Hmm, yes, you're right. That won't make a big difference in practice but returning 1 would be better. Thanks, -- Jean Delvare _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
