[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120806181729.GP4352@mwanda>
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2012 21:17:30 +0300
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To: Devendra Naga <develkernel412222@...il.com>
Cc: devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
Devendra Naga <devendra.aaru@...il.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>,
Javier Muñoz <jmunhoz@...lia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: sm7xxfb: copy name of the device before calling
smtc_alloc_fb_info
On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 09:57:52PM +0545, Devendra Naga wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 7:57 PM, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com> wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 04, 2012 at 11:06:12PM +0545, Devendra Naga wrote:
> >> as we do a strcpy(smdrv_ptr->fb_struct->fix->id, name), and the name here in
> >> sm7xxx_probe is not having any assignment, and which leads to copying of the garbage value
> >> into the id field of the fix struct of fb interface struct. fix it by copying the name before
> >> calling alloc_fbinfo
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Devendra Naga <develkernel412222@...il.com>
> >> ---
> >> Only compile tested
> >> This patch is not tested using the hardware... if any one is having this hardware, i request them to
> >> please test this
> >> drivers/staging/sm7xxfb/sm7xxfb.c | 7 ++++---
> >> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/staging/sm7xxfb/sm7xxfb.c b/drivers/staging/sm7xxfb/sm7xxfb.c
> >> index 1c1780c..d3957ef 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/staging/sm7xxfb/sm7xxfb.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/staging/sm7xxfb/sm7xxfb.c
> >> @@ -798,16 +798,17 @@ static int __devinit smtcfb_pci_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev,
> >> if (err)
> >> return err;
> >>
> >> + sprintf(name, "sm%Xfb", ent->device);
> >> +
> >> sfb = smtc_alloc_fb_info(pdev, name);
> >>
> >> + sfb->chip_id = ent->device;
> >> +
> >> if (!sfb) {
> >
> > Thanks for fixing this, and well done for spotting the bug.
> >
> Thanks Dan...
>
> > There is a dereference before the check here, but I see you resent
> > this in another thread. Next time could you respond to the
> > original with a message which says to not apply it.
> >
> Sure but i have a doubt.
>
> since we do V++ after every change to the sent patch , do we really
> need to say that please dont apply this patch and there's one more
> patch coming with fix?
Yes. The second email very far away from the first one if you are
subscribed to a bunch of high traffic email lists.
I reviewed your patch. I saw the bug. I saw that no one else had
replied to your email. I almost didn't notice the v2 email. It's
annoying. It's not hard to just send an email. "Oops. There is
a bug here. I'll sent a v2."
regards,
dan carpenter
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists