lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140121054932.GO9558@ns203013.ovh.net>
Date:	Tue, 21 Jan 2014 06:49:32 +0100
From:	Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@...osoft.com>
To:	Bo Shen <voice.shen@...el.com>
Cc:	Felipe Balbi <balbi@...com>, nicolas.ferre@...el.com,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] USB: at91: fix the number of endpoint parameter

On 11:39 Mon 20 Jan     , Bo Shen wrote:
> Hi J,
> 
> On 01/18/2014 01:20 PM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> >On 10:59 Fri 17 Jan     , Bo Shen wrote:
> >>In sama5d3 SoC, there are 16 endpoints. As the USBA_NR_ENDPOINTS
> >>is only 7. So, fix it for sama5d3 SoC using the udc->num_ep.
> >>
> >>Signed-off-by: Bo Shen <voice.shen@...el.com>
> >>---
> >>
> >>  drivers/usb/gadget/atmel_usba_udc.c | 2 +-
> >>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >>diff --git a/drivers/usb/gadget/atmel_usba_udc.c b/drivers/usb/gadget/atmel_usba_udc.c
> >>index 2cb52e0..7e67a81 100644
> >>--- a/drivers/usb/gadget/atmel_usba_udc.c
> >>+++ b/drivers/usb/gadget/atmel_usba_udc.c
> >>@@ -1670,7 +1670,7 @@ static irqreturn_t usba_udc_irq(int irq, void *devid)
> >>  	if (ep_status) {
> >>  		int i;
> >>
> >>-		for (i = 0; i < USBA_NR_ENDPOINTS; i++)
> >>+		for (i = 0; i < udc->num_ep; i++)
> >
> >no the limit need to specified in the driver as a checkpoint by the compatible
> >or platform driver id
> 
> You mean, we should not trust the data passed from dt node or
> platform data? Or do you think we should do double confirm?

no base on the driver name or the compatible you will known the MAX EP

not based on the dt ep description

as we do on pinctrl-at91

Best Regards,
J.
> >>  			if (ep_status & (1 << i)) {
> >>  				if (ep_is_control(&udc->usba_ep[i]))
> >>  					usba_control_irq(udc, &udc->usba_ep[i]);
> >>--
> >>1.8.5.2
> >>
> 
> Best Regards,
> Bo Shen
--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ