Quoting nixiaoming (2019-03-30 06:54:50)
> In the function divider_recalc_rate() The judgment of the return value of
> _get_div() indicates that the return value of _get_div() can be 0.
When does _get_div() return 0? It can't be CLK_DIVIDER_MAX_AT_ZERO or
CLK_DIVIDER_POWER_OF_TWO. I suppose it could be CLK_DIVIDER_ONE_BASED if
CLK_DIVIDER_ALLOW_ZERO is set? Or just CLK_DIVIDER_ALLOW_ZERO is set? Or
a table that has 0 in it for some odd reason.
> In order to avoid the divide-by-zero error, add check for return value
> of _get_div() in the divider_ro_round_rate_parent()
>
> Signed-off-by: nixiaoming <nixiaom...@huawei.com>
> Reviewed-by: Mukesh Ojha <mo...@codeaurora.org>
> ---
> drivers/clk/clk-divider.c | 3 +++
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk-divider.c b/drivers/clk/clk-divider.c
> index e5a1726..f4bf7a4 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/clk-divider.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/clk-divider.c
> @@ -347,6 +347,9 @@ long divider_ro_round_rate_parent(struct clk_hw *hw,
> struct clk_hw *parent,
> int div;
>
> div = _get_div(table, val, flags, width);
> + /* avoid divide-by-zero */
> + if (!div)
> + return -EINVAL;
Can you please give more details on what's happening here? Who's the
caller? What are the arguments being passed in? Shouldn't we check for
CLK_DIVIDER_ALLOW_ZERO and then return prate as it comes in instead of
returning an error?
>
> /* Even a read-only clock can propagate a rate change */
> if (clk_hw_get_flags(hw) & CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT) {
