linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Fix IO address calculation with Multi-Fintek PCI-to-UART Product

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]

Date:	Wed, 19 Nov 2014 13:42:36 +0800
From:	Peter Hung <hpeter@...il.com>
To:	Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
CC:	jslaby@...e.cz, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix IO address calculation with Multi-Fintek PCI-to-UART
 Product

Dear Greg KH and Senior Linuxers,

I had some some question, If I submited a patch, but it had rejected, 
how should I do when fix the patch?

1. send patch by reply original email ?
2. direct send patch with new email again?
3. other ways ?

Live long and prosper
Thanks

Greg KH 於 2014/11/19 上午 12:58 寫道:
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 05:48:08PM +0800, Peter Hung wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: Peter Hung <hpeter+linux_kernel@...il.com>
>
> We need some kind of information in the body of the changelog here.
>
>> ---
>>   drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_pci.c | 37 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
>>   1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_pci.c b/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_pci.c
>> index 0468e15..255bc56 100644
>> --- a/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_pci.c
>> +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_pci.c
>> @@ -1551,28 +1551,31 @@ static int pci_fintek_setup(struct serial_private *priv,
>>   {
>>   	struct pci_dev *pdev = priv->dev;
>>   	unsigned long base;
>> -	unsigned long iobase;
>> +	unsigned long iobase = 0;
>>   	unsigned long ciobase = 0;
>>   	u8 config_base;
>> +	u32 bar_data[3];
>> +	
>>
>
> _ALWAYS_ run your patches through checkpatch.pl and fix up the issues it
> reports so that a grumpy maintainer doesn't reject your patch for
> obvious issues :(
>
>
>
>>   	/*
>>   	 * We are supposed to be able to read these from the PCI config space,
>>   	 * but the values there don't seem to match what we need to use, so
>>   	 * just use these hard-coded values for now, as they are correct.
>>   	 */
>> +
>>   	switch (idx) {
>> -	case 0: iobase = 0xe000; config_base = 0x40; break;
>> -	case 1: iobase = 0xe008; config_base = 0x48; break;
>> -	case 2: iobase = 0xe010; config_base = 0x50; break;
>> -	case 3: iobase = 0xe018; config_base = 0x58; break;
>> -	case 4: iobase = 0xe020; config_base = 0x60; break;
>> -	case 5: iobase = 0xe028; config_base = 0x68; break;
>> -	case 6: iobase = 0xe030; config_base = 0x70; break;
>> -	case 7: iobase = 0xe038; config_base = 0x78; break;
>> -	case 8: iobase = 0xe040; config_base = 0x80; break;
>> -	case 9: iobase = 0xe048; config_base = 0x88; break;
>> -	case 10: iobase = 0xe050; config_base = 0x90; break;
>> -	case 11: iobase = 0xe058; config_base = 0x98; break;
>> +	case 0: config_base = 0x40; break;
>> +	case 1: config_base = 0x48; break;
>> +	case 2: config_base = 0x50; break;
>> +	case 3: config_base = 0x58; break;
>> +	case 4: config_base = 0x60; break;
>> +	case 5: config_base = 0x68; break;
>> +	case 6: config_base = 0x70; break;
>> +	case 7: config_base = 0x78; break;
>> +	case 8: config_base = 0x80; break;
>> +	case 9: config_base = 0x88; break;
>> +	case 10: config_base = 0x90; break;
>> +	case 11: config_base = 0x98; break;
>>   	default:
>>   		/* Unknown number of ports, get out of here */
>>   		return -EINVAL;
>> @@ -1583,9 +1586,17 @@ static int pci_fintek_setup(struct serial_private *priv,
>>   		ciobase = (int)(base + (0x8 * idx));
>>   	}
>>
>> +	pci_read_config_dword(pdev, 0x24, &bar_data[0]);
>> +	pci_read_config_dword(pdev, 0x20, &bar_data[1]);
>> +	pci_read_config_dword(pdev, 0x1c, &bar_data[2]);
>> +
>> +	/* Calculate Real IO Port */
>> +	iobase = (bar_data[idx/4] & 0xffffffE0) + (idx % 4) * 8;
>> +
>>   	dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "%s: idx=%d iobase=0x%lx ciobase=0x%lx config_base=0x%2x\n",
>>   		__func__, idx, iobase, ciobase, config_base);
>>
>> +
>
> New line added for no reason?
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
>
--
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/