[PATCH] ASoC: ops: Fix off by one in range control validation
We currently report that range controls accept a range of 0..(max-min) but accept writes in the range 0..(max-min+1). Remove that extra +1.
Signed-off-by: Mark Brown broonie@kernel.org --- sound/soc/soc-ops.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/sound/soc/soc-ops.c b/sound/soc/soc-ops.c index 93e72a016b4d..e11109dcaa50 100644 --- a/sound/soc/soc-ops.c +++ b/sound/soc/soc-ops.c @@ -542,7 +542,7 @@ int snd_soc_put_volsw_range(struct snd_kcontrol *kcontrol, return -EINVAL; if (mc->platform_max && tmp > mc->platform_max) return -EINVAL; - if (tmp > mc->max - mc->min + 1) + if (tmp > mc->max - mc->min) return -EINVAL;
if (invert) @@ -563,7 +563,7 @@ int snd_soc_put_volsw_range(struct snd_kcontrol *kcontrol, return -EINVAL; if (mc->platform_max && tmp > mc->platform_max) return -EINVAL; - if (tmp > mc->max - mc->min + 1) + if (tmp > mc->max - mc->min) return -EINVAL;
if (invert)
On Sat, 4 Jun 2022 11:52:46 +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
We currently report that range controls accept a range of 0..(max-min) but accept writes in the range 0..(max-min+1). Remove that extra +1.
Applied to
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/sound.git for-next
Thanks!
[1/1] ASoC: ops: Fix off by one in range control validation commit: 5871321fb4558c55bf9567052b618ff0be6b975e
All being well this means that it will be integrated into the linux-next tree (usually sometime in the next 24 hours) and sent to Linus during the next merge window (or sooner if it is a bug fix), however if problems are discovered then the patch may be dropped or reverted.
You may get further e-mails resulting from automated or manual testing and review of the tree, please engage with people reporting problems and send followup patches addressing any issues that are reported if needed.
If any updates are required or you are submitting further changes they should be sent as incremental updates against current git, existing patches will not be replaced.
Please add any relevant lists and maintainers to the CCs when replying to this mail.
Thanks, Mark
participants (1)
-
Mark Brown