Hi,
On 12 January 2015 at 18:24, Joonyoung Shim jy0922.shim@samsung.com wrote:
Hi,
I found below compile warnings,
CC arch/arm/cpu/armv7/exynos/clock.o arch/arm/cpu/armv7/exynos/clock.c: In function ‘clock_get_periph_rate’: arch/arm/cpu/armv7/exynos/clock.c:265:47: warning: array subscript is above array bounds [-Warray-bounds] struct clk_bit_info *bit_info = &clk_bit_info[peripheral]; ^ arch/arm/cpu/armv7/exynos/clock.c:265:47: warning: array subscript is above array bounds [-Warray-bounds]
...
static unsigned long exynos5_get_periph_rate(int peripheral) { struct clk_bit_info *bit_info = &clk_bit_info[peripheral];
This can access out of bounds of clk_bit_info[] array from exynos5_get_periph_rate(). The peripheral value comes from enum periph_id but it gets out of count clk_bit_info[] array.
So, i don't think exynos5_get_periph_rate is working correctly. Currently, exynos5_get_periph_rate is used by clock_get_periph_rate only from get_pwm_clk.
Is it ongoing to work for generic api to get the clk freq? If not, let's remove exynos5_get_periph_rate and clock_get_periph_rate.
That's going in the wrong direction - these functions make the code much easier to follow and refactor. We should remove get_pwm_clk(), get_mmc_clk() etc. and use generic functions instead.
Regards, Simon