> -----Original Message-----
> From: Intel-xe <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Naladala 
> Ramanaidu
> Sent: Friday, 17 October 2025 18.05
> To: [email protected]; [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]; Nautiyal, Ankit K 
> <[email protected]>; Naladala, Ramanaidu
> <[email protected]>
> Subject: [PATCH v2] drm/i915: Add fallback for CDCLK selection when min_cdclk 
> is too high
> 
> In cases where the requested minimum CDCLK exceeds all available values for 
> the current reference clock, the CDCLK selection
> logic previously returned 0. This could result coverity division or modulo by 
> zero issue.
> 
> This change introduces a fallback mechanism that returns the platform's 
> max_cdclk_freq instead of 0.
> 
> v2: Update safe fallback value to max cdclk.
> 
> Fixes: Coverity CID 2628056

We shouldn't mention the static analysis error ids as most of the audience 
cannot trace it back.

With this change, this is 

Reviewed-by: Mika Kahola <[email protected]>

> 
> Signed-off-by: Naladala Ramanaidu <[email protected]>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_cdclk.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_cdclk.c 
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_cdclk.c
> index e92e7fd9fd13..da97c38cca14 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_cdclk.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_cdclk.c
> @@ -1561,7 +1561,7 @@ static int bxt_calc_cdclk(struct intel_display 
> *display, int min_cdclk)
>       drm_WARN(display->drm, 1,
>                "Cannot satisfy minimum cdclk %d with refclk %u\n",
>                min_cdclk, display->cdclk.hw.ref);
> -     return 0;
> +     return display->cdclk.max_cdclk_freq;
>  }
> 
>  static int bxt_calc_cdclk_pll_vco(struct intel_display *display, int cdclk)
> --
> 2.43.0

Reply via email to