linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] dmaengine: qcom-bam: fix circular buffer handling

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:   Tue, 18 Jun 2019 21:57:49 +0530
From:   Sricharan R <sricharan@...eaurora.org>
To:     Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>,
        vkoul@...nel.org
Cc:     dmaengine@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dmaengine: qcom-bam: fix circular buffer handling



On 6/18/2019 8:42 PM, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote:
> 
> 
> On 18/06/2019 15:56, Sricharan R wrote:
>>    So MAX_DESCRIPTORS is used in driver for masking head/tail pointers.
>>    That's why we have to pass MAX_DESCRIPTORS + 1 so that it works
>>    when the Macros does a size - 1
> Isn't that incorrect to do that, pretending to have more descriptors than we actually have?
> 

 The Macro's expect that buffer size is power of 2. So we are infact passing the actual correct
 size ( MAX_DESCRIPTORS + 1 = 4096)

Regards,
 Sricharan

-- 
"QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation