On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 5:03 PM Pavel Machek <pavel@denx.de> wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> > >  /* TODO: Support multiple regulators */
> > > -static int opp_parse_supplies(struct dev_pm_opp *opp, struct device *dev)
> > > +static int opp_parse_supplies(struct dev_pm_opp *opp, struct device *dev,
> > > +                         struct device_opp *dev_opp)
> > >  {
> > >     u32 microvolt[3] = {0};
> > >     u32 val;
> > >     int count, ret;
> > > +   struct property *prop = NULL;
> > > +   char name[NAME_MAX];
> > > +
> > > +   /* Search for "opp-microvolt-<name>" */
> > > +   if (dev_opp->prop_name) {
> > > +           sprintf(name, "opp-microvolt-%s", dev_opp->prop_name);
> > > +           prop = of_find_property(opp->np, name, NULL);
> > > +   }
> > > +
> > > +   if (!prop) {
> > > +           /* Search for "opp-microvolt" */
> > > +           name[13] = '\0';
> > > +           prop = of_find_property(opp->np, name, NULL);
> >
> > If in !dev_opp->prop_name, it will pass uninitialized buffer to
> > of_find_property.
>
> This is fixed in the next patch. But I wonder if we should merge them
> into one for -cip... Unlike mainline, we already know about the
> bug. No need to prepare trap for people doing bisect.

That is a good argument. I suppose we just need to make sure the end
result records both upstream commits, and that all of our automated
tools can handle that.

ChenYu