@@ -1432,7 +1432,7 @@ int rtsx_read_cfg_dw(struct rtsx_chip *chip, u8 func_no, u16 addr, u32 *val)
}
int rtsx_write_cfg_seq(struct rtsx_chip *chip, u8 func, u16 addr, u8 *buf,
- int len)
+ u16 len)
{
u32 *data, *mask;
u16 offset = addr % 4;
@@ -963,7 +963,7 @@ int rtsx_write_cfg_dw(struct rtsx_chip *chip,
u8 func_no, u16 addr, u32 mask, u32 val);
int rtsx_read_cfg_dw(struct rtsx_chip *chip, u8 func_no, u16 addr, u32 *val);
int rtsx_write_cfg_seq(struct rtsx_chip *chip,
- u8 func, u16 addr, u8 *buf, int len);
+ u8 func, u16 addr, u8 *buf, u16 len);
int rtsx_read_cfg_seq(struct rtsx_chip *chip,
u8 func, u16 addr, u8 *buf, int len);
int rtsx_write_phy_register(struct rtsx_chip *chip, u8 addr, u16 val);
A warning occurs when vzalloc is annotated in a subsequent patch to tell the compiler that its parameter is an allocation size: drivers/staging/rts5208/rtsx_chip.c: In function ‘rtsx_write_cfg_seq’: drivers/staging/rts5208/rtsx_chip.c:1453:7: warning: argument 1 value ‘18446744073709551615’ exceeds maximum object size 9223372036854775807 [-Walloc-size-larger-than=] data = vzalloc(array_size(dw_len, 4)); ~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ This occurs because len and dw_len are signed integers and the parameter to array_size is a size_t. If dw_len is a negative integer, it will become a very large positive number when cast to size_t. This could cause an overflow, so array_size(), will return SIZE_MAX _at compile time_. gcc then notices that this value is too large for an allocation and throws a warning. rtsx_write_cfg_seq is only called from write_cfg_byte in rtsx_scsi.c. There, len is a u16. So make len a u16 in rtsx_write_cfg_seq too. This means dw_len can never be negative, avoiding the potential overflow and the warning. This should not cause a functional change, but was compile tested only. Signed-off-by: Daniel Axtens <dja@axtens.net> --- drivers/staging/rts5208/rtsx_chip.c | 2 +- drivers/staging/rts5208/rtsx_chip.h | 2 +- 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)