netdev - Re: [PATCH 2/2] net: ethernet: cpsw: fix interrupt lookup logic in cpsw

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: <5406CFD9.6060706@ti.com>
Date:	Wed, 3 Sep 2014 13:52:49 +0530
From:	Mugunthan V N <mugunthanvnm@...com>
To:	Daniel Mack <daniel@...que.org>, <davem@...emloft.net>
CC:	<julia.lawall@...6.fr>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	<george.cherian@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] net: ethernet: cpsw: fix interrupt lookup logic in
 cpsw_probe()

On Wednesday 03 September 2014 01:00 PM, Daniel Mack wrote:
> On 09/03/2014 09:28 AM, Mugunthan V N wrote:
>> On Tuesday 02 September 2014 10:14 PM, Daniel Mack wrote:
>>> The code in cpsw_probe() currently iterates over the available
>>> interrupt resources and requests each of them.  While doing so, it
>>> keeps track of their indices through priv->irqs_table.
>>>
>>> However, the code currently only remembers the last interrupt in
>>> a resource, and will leak the others if there is more than one.
>>> This can only happen for board-file driven platforms and not via DT,
>>> however.
>>>
>>> Also, there is currently no bounds check, while priv->irqs_table is a
>>> fixed-size array. If we are passed more than 4 resources, we're in
>>> trouble.
>>>
>>> This patch introduces a bounds check and changes the way interrupt
>>> indices are kept. Tested on a Beagle Bone Black board only.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Mack <zonque@...il.com>
>>
>> The drivers is not supported for non-DT platforms as all the platforms
>> which uses CPSW are DT only platforms.
> 
> Ok, thanks for explaining.
> 
> But then we can remove the iteration then and simplify the code, right?
> The bounds check should also be done.
> 

Right, we can simplify the code.

Regards
Mugunthan V N

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html