If the clk_get_rate return '0', it will happen division by zero.

Fixes: 3bcbd1a85b68 ("gpio/rockchip: support next version gpio controller")
Signed-off-by: Ye Zhang <ye.zhang@rock-chips.com>
---
 drivers/gpio/gpio-rockchip.c | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-rockchip.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-rockchip.c
index 0bd339813110..712258224eb3 100644
--- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-rockchip.c
+++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-rockchip.c
@@ -207,6 +207,8 @@ static int rockchip_gpio_set_debounce(struct gpio_chip *gc,
 	if (bank->gpio_type == GPIO_TYPE_V2 && !IS_ERR(bank->db_clk)) {
 		div_debounce_support = true;
 		freq = clk_get_rate(bank->db_clk);
+		if (!freq)
+			return -EINVAL;
 		max_debounce = (GENMASK(23, 0) + 1) * 2 * 1000000 / freq;
 		if (debounce > max_debounce)
 			return -EINVAL;
-- 
2.34.1

On Tue, Sep 03, 2024 at 03:36:38PM +0800, Ye Zhang wrote:
> If the clk_get_rate return '0', it will happen division by zero.

I don't understand the circumstances when it may happen.

> Fixes: 3bcbd1a85b68 ("gpio/rockchip: support next version gpio controller")

Not sure that this actually fixes anything. See below why I think so.

...

>  	if (bank->gpio_type == GPIO_TYPE_V2 && !IS_ERR(bank->db_clk)) {

Here you explicitly checked that the clock is provided by DT.

...

>  		freq = clk_get_rate(bank->db_clk);

Here you read the frequency which may be 0 in two cases:
1) in DT explicitly set to 0;
2) CCF is disabled.

So, wrong DTs have to be validated / fixed beforehand, correct?

But if the CCF is disabled, the db_clk is NULL. Moreover I don't see
how the db_clk may contain error pointer as you have it filtered out
at _get_bank_data(). So, maybe what you need is to have NULL check
in the conditional and explaining more in the commit message why it
is currently a problematic code?

> +		if (!freq)
> +			return -EINVAL;

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko