I noticed an array underflow in ov5693_enum_frame_size(). The code
looks like this:
int index = fse->index;
if (index >= N_RES)
retur -EINVAL;
fse->index is a u32 that comes from the user. We want negative values
to be counted as -EINVAL but they aren't. There are several ways to fix
this but I feel like the best fix for future proofing is to change the
type of N_RES from int to unsigned long to make it the same as if we
were comparing against ARRAY_SIZE().
Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@s-opensource.com>
#define N_RES_VIDEO (ARRAY_SIZE(gc0310_res_video))
static struct gc0310_resolution *gc0310_res = gc0310_res_preview;
-static int N_RES = N_RES_PREVIEW;
+static unsigned long N_RES = N_RES_PREVIEW;
#endif
#define N_RES_VIDEO (ARRAY_SIZE(gc2235_res_video))
static struct gc2235_resolution *gc2235_res = gc2235_res_preview;
-static int N_RES = N_RES_PREVIEW;
+static unsigned long N_RES = N_RES_PREVIEW;
#endif
#define N_RES_VIDEO (ARRAY_SIZE(ov2680_res_video))
static struct ov2680_resolution *ov2680_res = ov2680_res_preview;
-static int N_RES = N_RES_PREVIEW;
-
+static unsigned long N_RES = N_RES_PREVIEW;
#endif
#define N_RES_VIDEO (ARRAY_SIZE(ov2722_res_video))
static struct ov2722_resolution *ov2722_res = ov2722_res_preview;
-static int N_RES = N_RES_PREVIEW;
+static unsigned long N_RES = N_RES_PREVIEW;
#endif
#define N_RES_VIDEO (ARRAY_SIZE(ov5693_res_video))
static struct ov5693_resolution *ov5693_res = ov5693_res_preview;
-static int N_RES = N_RES_PREVIEW;
+static unsigned long N_RES = N_RES_PREVIEW;
#endif