Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: qcom-hw: Fix reading "reg" with address/size-cells != 2

From: Konrad Dybcio
Date: Mon Dec 12 2022 - 04:10:42 EST




On 12.12.2022 07:44, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 09-12-22, 16:07, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>> Commit 054a3ef683a1 ("cpufreq: qcom-hw: Allocate qcom_cpufreq_data during
>> probe") assumed that every reg variable is 4*u32 wide (as most new qcom
>
> corresponding ")" is missing.
>
>> SoCs set #address- and #size-cells to <2>. That is not the case for all of
>> them though. Check the cells values dynamically to ensure the proper
>> region of the DTB is being read.
>>
>> Fixes: 054a3ef683a1 ("cpufreq: qcom-hw: Allocate qcom_cpufreq_data during probe")
>> Signed-off-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-hw.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++--
>> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-hw.c b/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-hw.c
>> index 340fed35e45d..22f48f789557 100644
>> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-hw.c
>> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-hw.c
>> @@ -649,9 +649,10 @@ static int qcom_cpufreq_hw_driver_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> {
>> struct clk_hw_onecell_data *clk_data;
>> struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
>> + struct device_node *soc_node;
>> struct device *cpu_dev;
>> struct clk *clk;
>> - int ret, i, num_domains;
>> + int ret, i, num_domains, reg_sz;
>>
>> clk = clk_get(dev, "xo");
>> if (IS_ERR(clk))
>> @@ -679,7 +680,22 @@ static int qcom_cpufreq_hw_driver_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> return ret;
>>
>> /* Allocate qcom_cpufreq_data based on the available frequency domains in DT */
>> - num_domains = of_property_count_elems_of_size(dev->of_node, "reg", sizeof(u32) * 4);
>> + soc_node = of_get_parent(dev->of_node);
>
> This must be dropped on failures later ?
Right.

>
>> + if (!soc_node)
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> +
>> + ret = of_property_read_u32(soc_node, "#address-cells", &reg_sz);
>> + if (ret)
>> + return ret;
>> +
>> + /* Reuse 'i', as it's only used later in the loop */
>
> This can be dropped in my opinion.
Sure.

>
>> + ret = of_property_read_u32(soc_node, "#size-cells", &i);
>
> Should i be initialized ?
Why? If this call succeeds, i is never read before being assigned
a value, and if it fails, the probe function will exit with an
error.

Konrad
>
>> + if (ret)
>> + return ret;
>> +
>> + reg_sz += i;
>> +
>> + num_domains = of_property_count_elems_of_size(dev->of_node, "reg", sizeof(u32) * reg_sz);
>> if (num_domains <= 0)
>> return num_domains;
>>
>> --
>> 2.38.1
>