Re: [PATCH 2.6.27-rc3] led: driver for LEDs on PCEngines ALIX.2 andALIX.3 boards

From: Stefan Richter
Date: Sun Aug 24 2008 - 06:09:25 EST


Andrew Morton wrote:
On Tue, 19 Aug 2008 22:23:41 +0500
Constantin Baranov <const@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
--- linux-2.6.27-rc3/drivers/leds/leds-alix.c 1970-01-01 04:00:00.000000000 +0400
+++ linux-2.6.27-rc3-alix/drivers/leds/leds-alix.c 2008-08-19 21:59:05.207153570 +0500
...
+static int __init alix_led_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
+{
+ int i;
+ int ret = 0;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(alix_leds) && ret >= 0; i++)
+ ret = led_classdev_register(&pdev->dev, &alix_leds[i].cdev);
+
+ if (ret < 0) {
+ for (i = i - 2; i >= 0; i--)

this is off-by-one, surely.

If we get here with i==1, we'll loop 4 billion times.

+ led_classdev_unregister(&alix_leds[i].cdev);
+ }
+
+ return ret;
+}
...
How's this look?
...
@@ -92,7 +95,7 @@ static int __init alix_led_probe(struct ret = led_classdev_register(&pdev->dev, &alix_leds[i].cdev);
if (ret < 0) {
- for (i = i - 2; i >= 0; i--)
+ while (--i >= 0)
led_classdev_unregister(&alix_leds[i].cdev);
}


Really? Constantin's code looks correct to me. He increments i once more after failure.

Perhaps write it easier to read; i.e. in the same way as most error return checks everywhere in the kernel:

for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(alix_leds); i++) {
ret = led_classdev_register(...etc...);
if (ret < 0)
break;
}

if (ret < 0)
while (i--)
led_classdev_unregister(&alix_leds[i].cdev);


Or while (--i >= 0)

or for (i--; i >= 0; i--)
--
Stefan Richter
-=====-==--- =--- ==---
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/