From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030700Ab2ERDLV (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 May 2012 23:11:21 -0400 Received: from shadbolt.e.decadent.org.uk ([88.96.1.126]:40391 "EHLO shadbolt.e.decadent.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1762532Ab2ERCw0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 May 2012 22:52:26 -0400 Message-Id: <20120518023254.521494545@decadent.org.uk> User-Agent: quilt/0.60-1 Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 03:32:55 +0100 From: Ben Hutchings To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org Cc: torvalds@linux-foundation.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, Axel Lin , Mark Brown Subject: [ 01/53] regulator: Fix the logic to ensure new voltage setting in valid range In-Reply-To: <20120518023254.339945758@decadent.org.uk> X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 192.168.4.185 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ben@decadent.org.uk X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on shadbolt.decadent.org.uk); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 3.2.18-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. ------------------ From: Axel Lin commit f55205f4d4a8823a11bb8b37ef2ecbd78fb09463 upstream. I think this is a typo. To ensure new voltage setting won't greater than desc->max, the equation should be desc->min + desc->step * new_val <= desc->max. Signed-off-by: Axel Lin Signed-off-by: Mark Brown Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings --- drivers/regulator/max8997.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/regulator/max8997.c b/drivers/regulator/max8997.c index 9657929..17a58c5 100644 --- a/drivers/regulator/max8997.c +++ b/drivers/regulator/max8997.c @@ -684,7 +684,7 @@ static int max8997_set_voltage_buck(struct regulator_dev *rdev, } new_val++; - } while (desc->min + desc->step + new_val <= desc->max); + } while (desc->min + desc->step * new_val <= desc->max); new_idx = tmp_idx; new_val = tmp_val; -- 1.7.10