Commit 144c8e17 authored by Chen Yu's avatar Chen Yu Committed by Rafael J. Wysocki

intel_pstate: Fix possible overflow complained by Coverity

Coverity scanning performed on intel_pstate.c shows possible
overflow when doing left shifting:
val = pstate << 8;
since pstate is of type integer, while val is of u64, left shifting
pstate might lead to potential loss of upper bits. Say, if pstate equals
0x4000 0000, after pstate << 8 we will get zero assigned to val.
Although pstate will not likely be that big, this patch cast the left
operand to u64 before performing the left shift, to avoid complaining
from Coverity.
Reported-by: default avatarCoquard, Christophe <christophe.coquard@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarChen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
parent fba9573b
......@@ -521,7 +521,7 @@ static void byt_set_pstate(struct cpudata *cpudata, int pstate)
int32_t vid_fp;
u32 vid;
val = pstate << 8;
val = (u64)pstate << 8;
if (limits.no_turbo && !limits.turbo_disabled)
val |= (u64)1 << 32;
......@@ -610,7 +610,7 @@ static void core_set_pstate(struct cpudata *cpudata, int pstate)
{
u64 val;
val = pstate << 8;
val = (u64)pstate << 8;
if (limits.no_turbo && !limits.turbo_disabled)
val |= (u64)1 << 32;
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment