On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 2:36 AM, Chris Johns <chr...@rtems.org> wrote: > > On 26/11/2014 10:02 am, Joel Sherrill wrote: >> >> From: Josh Oguin <josh.og...@oarcorp.com> >> >> This was flagged by CodeSonar. It should be impossible to get an >> incorrect baud number back but ensure this in debug mode. The _Assert() >> keeps their scanner from evaluating for divide by 0 past this point. >> --- >> c/src/libchip/serial/ns16550-context.c | 4 ++++ >> c/src/libchip/serial/ns16550.c | 3 +++ >> c/src/libchip/serial/z85c30.c | 8 +++++++- >> 3 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/c/src/libchip/serial/ns16550-context.c >> b/c/src/libchip/serial/ns16550-context.c >> index 00ad89c..087627a 100644 >> --- a/c/src/libchip/serial/ns16550-context.c >> +++ b/c/src/libchip/serial/ns16550-context.c >> @@ -592,9 +592,13 @@ static bool ns16550_set_attributes( >> >> /* >> * Calculate the baud rate divisor >> + * >> + * Assert ensures there is no division by 0. >> */ >> >> baud_requested = rtems_termios_baud_to_number(t->c_cflag); >> + _Assert( baud_requested != 0 ); >> + > > > Should this return an error or the value should be tested in an upper layer. > I will raise a ticket to have the upper layers reject B0 as a baud rate. > Good point.
> Chris > > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list > devel@rtems.org > http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
