[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6b12d222-f0ad-449d-a1b7-5c605c7def81@oss.qualcomm.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2026 04:52:00 -0500
From: Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@....qualcomm.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: lgirdwood@...il.com, robh@...nel.org, krzk+dt@...nel.org,
conor+dt@...nel.org, srini@...nel.org, perex@...ex.cz, tiwai@...e.com,
alexey.klimov@...aro.org, mohammad.rafi.shaik@....qualcomm.com,
quic_wcheng@...cinc.com, johan@...nel.org,
dmitry.baryshkov@....qualcomm.com, konrad.dybcio@....qualcomm.com,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-sound@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/10] ASoC: qcom: q6apm: fix array out of bounds on lpass
ports
On 2/5/26 12:46 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 05, 2026 at 12:14:02PM -0500, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote:
>> lpass ports numbers have been added but the apm driver never got updated
>> with new max port value that it uses to store dai specific data.
>>
>> This will result in array out of bounds and weird driver behaviour.
>> Fix this by adding a new LPASS_MAX_PORT which is can be used by driver
>> instead of using number and any new port additional can only be done in
>> one place, which should avoid these type of mistakes in future.
>
> It would probably be good to improve the valdiation in the driver when
> it starts using port numbers.
Good idea, will try that out in next spin.
--srini
Powered by blists - more mailing lists