From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-16.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B73AC4338F for ; Mon, 9 Aug 2021 09:42:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E72060F35 for ; Mon, 9 Aug 2021 09:42:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S234440AbhHIJmj (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Aug 2021 05:42:39 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:35742 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S234365AbhHIJmh (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Aug 2021 05:42:37 -0400 Received: from mail-pl1-x62e.google.com (mail-pl1-x62e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::62e]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 68835C061796 for ; Mon, 9 Aug 2021 02:42:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pl1-x62e.google.com with SMTP id d17so15714514plr.12 for ; Mon, 09 Aug 2021 02:42:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chromium.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=A+KAi3dOJuuXd/Qn6cacTVo6xH3AW7xPjOFYRrz7Uok=; b=HymP0PD2B0cGVjnMKzIUkUNnIY+q8voQCdep9RSZJP0rhHG+lzU47AL/ksz8la8qDT ROPMbY8e9eOtI20PzVcxAUx7Z2MOEU0oxI5YdRQlekp97dEmylrRvQrzzmpiHwOK2CdZ 0+e/b0xFJgPZRRRdDWQ1rAhnthQkeuCeTmaKQ= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=A+KAi3dOJuuXd/Qn6cacTVo6xH3AW7xPjOFYRrz7Uok=; b=evQjNtttCo9qMwIIqCBg5iurPIXptIufa9wyqEmmIU7DjoVRFfp6UUARIQQxfmYzZK vXniEU1ewehP5HfMl9vdPeNLiEklRkCDkjdMTwmtSprYyO9f1igys2hjwtFySNqgOabj q9YTsIEt8c2EwRes3Ez/o1d214gKyTHwBfsYvRIK1mpRGtdRXlJC+3xc4/EpfQA3M002 hgkCLepv5XXvULCQirnx2gzUrCYELq0ZVL2NuVbHXh1LGy37f5qlZF3Rv+tdSIAQ23dO ox6f37PvNLz9FNls1uH9W4o1IV3zNLBifA/ioz1o6VxYFLF1oqx1w8UyUSeqRO4tGKpm ZhhA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531pmqwkuaYIfG4vrqRlMDYXzeZ0rkGFVSkx+VJUCOAomyJpwSRy nksT2ZaBjHhpvxGtRaUc/OenIJvzTSZBM0k7vFQ+jg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwRNv1bYkHAya2aLwiLdoTT5Z3Wow97kzaNiR834PT5Mj0uvowBEIf7DGlFoiv/Uu/Nnd6z8yYjrp74f4fs4XI= X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:102:: with SMTP id p2mr674822pjz.126.1628502135890; Mon, 09 Aug 2021 02:42:15 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210809165904.RFC.1.I5165a4a8da5cac23c9928b1ec3c3a1a7383b7c23@changeid> In-Reply-To: From: Ikjoon Jang Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2021 17:42:05 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] usb: xhci-mtk: handle bandwidth table rollover To: Greg Kroah-Hartman Cc: linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, Chunfeng Yun , "moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support" , Matthias Brugger , open list , "moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support" , Mathias Nyman Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 5:11 PM Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 09, 2021 at 04:59:29PM +0800, Ikjoon Jang wrote: > > xhci-mtk has 64 slots for periodic bandwidth calculations and each > > slot represents byte budgets on a microframe. When an endpoint's > > allocation sits on the boundary of the table, byte budgets' slot > > should be rolled over but the current implementation doesn't. > > > > This patch applies a 6 bits mask to the microframe index to handle > > its rollover 64 slots and prevent out-of-bounds array access. > > > > Signed-off-by: Ikjoon Jang > > --- > > > > drivers/usb/host/xhci-mtk-sch.c | 79 +++++++++------------------------ > > drivers/usb/host/xhci-mtk.h | 1 + > > 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 57 deletions(-) > > Why is this "RFC"? What needs to be addressed in this change before it > can be accepted? sorry, I had to mention why this is RFC: I simply don't know about the details of the xhci-mtk internals. It was okay from my tests with mt8173 and I think this will be harmless as this is "better than before". But when I removed get_esit_boundary(), I really have no idea why it was there. I'm wondering if there was another reason of that function other than just preventing out-of-bounds. Maybe chunfeng can answer this? Thanks! > > thanks, > > greg k-h From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D001AC4338F for ; Mon, 9 Aug 2021 09:42:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8E6A460F8F for ; Mon, 9 Aug 2021 09:42:31 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org 8E6A460F8F Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=chromium.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:Cc:To:Subject:Message-ID:Date:From: In-Reply-To:References:MIME-Version:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=/VhSKnLPuAbFpSpIBdv55ae29NqGa/tIAa8xz3MHtBM=; b=s5DYTTX1g3OEi+ G5FFE8KT78ofYxn5P6idLuR/7Gpda96VmJQzylFZOx+qfCEcItd3C/ISzqRg9vYVD+pN5MSfGKeUm GY3pgTbegl9wyd44rfR1VP3lvp/hA0W01S//jycK3jZEwv5FNq96TA1sbhVGe2LuKO0rRnv/Zqg+8 HW2uXrEIql9ecsazoLhB8IMfEU9hL5fc9k4N+X33rgfolNJTITL3exd2z1G9F+scUdqSLysOMnECs EMn/fdAGgprC4PgVtGvEc/HSZh3IVNI5jw7jReViFe+IMyRCl8YjM0N+0WjfAQY8MKYNRNsV1fxJZ KAG4WeNXnjtz3q+qnrcQ==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1mD1nY-0003Lh-1D; Mon, 09 Aug 2021 09:42:20 +0000 Received: from mail-pl1-x62c.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::62c]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1mD1nV-0003Kb-1V for linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 09 Aug 2021 09:42:18 +0000 Received: by mail-pl1-x62c.google.com with SMTP id a20so15798596plm.0 for ; Mon, 09 Aug 2021 02:42:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chromium.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=A+KAi3dOJuuXd/Qn6cacTVo6xH3AW7xPjOFYRrz7Uok=; b=HymP0PD2B0cGVjnMKzIUkUNnIY+q8voQCdep9RSZJP0rhHG+lzU47AL/ksz8la8qDT ROPMbY8e9eOtI20PzVcxAUx7Z2MOEU0oxI5YdRQlekp97dEmylrRvQrzzmpiHwOK2CdZ 0+e/b0xFJgPZRRRdDWQ1rAhnthQkeuCeTmaKQ= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=A+KAi3dOJuuXd/Qn6cacTVo6xH3AW7xPjOFYRrz7Uok=; b=PUufh5FD5vUwotbfW3LCFKaFFO/4P0L/tmqvBvmCYhs0ANF1i7PvEeDSDLfr3yV/zv a26n2Iltw5cwNmfPdSwd76EgxwxOfZw7xNZJRFBf7iUQ8Jn5+qdeXGrqxwQ+LxKzQ6M+ xaZwTESV4yu+oEAflXCxyHxYO0dkocek9Md1HpelEShMt0fiZSqBrZ/8e4vRPKw+BSqV sWPRdkqMyIS3QL9yeHHGj66BarhDcc+4zrF9FgHh3+eGJpnTvb4SJ0lOBOU2ccRYpx2v NBeZAaE7YE+uAL0EEIRdJ4/LjeGdXzM7sgcqpN79OXsJCSf5ztoZFnJ7/Yy4UHRqiP2A Z6Pw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530YsSvXCTiMyazRfW0kzyF4JAXBHjp47rklIIOg9rJW1+yWEdQX 6MZ2yg0R32Wq/ChbTBxSMwveoMuYrrG7NjTG4HYcBA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwRNv1bYkHAya2aLwiLdoTT5Z3Wow97kzaNiR834PT5Mj0uvowBEIf7DGlFoiv/Uu/Nnd6z8yYjrp74f4fs4XI= X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:102:: with SMTP id p2mr674822pjz.126.1628502135890; Mon, 09 Aug 2021 02:42:15 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210809165904.RFC.1.I5165a4a8da5cac23c9928b1ec3c3a1a7383b7c23@changeid> In-Reply-To: From: Ikjoon Jang Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2021 17:42:05 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] usb: xhci-mtk: handle bandwidth table rollover To: Greg Kroah-Hartman Cc: linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, Chunfeng Yun , "moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support" , Matthias Brugger , open list , "moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support" , Mathias Nyman X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20210809_024217_148296_7C877FBE X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 19.09 ) X-BeenThere: linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "Linux-mediatek" Errors-To: linux-mediatek-bounces+linux-mediatek=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 5:11 PM Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 09, 2021 at 04:59:29PM +0800, Ikjoon Jang wrote: > > xhci-mtk has 64 slots for periodic bandwidth calculations and each > > slot represents byte budgets on a microframe. When an endpoint's > > allocation sits on the boundary of the table, byte budgets' slot > > should be rolled over but the current implementation doesn't. > > > > This patch applies a 6 bits mask to the microframe index to handle > > its rollover 64 slots and prevent out-of-bounds array access. > > > > Signed-off-by: Ikjoon Jang > > --- > > > > drivers/usb/host/xhci-mtk-sch.c | 79 +++++++++------------------------ > > drivers/usb/host/xhci-mtk.h | 1 + > > 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 57 deletions(-) > > Why is this "RFC"? What needs to be addressed in this change before it > can be accepted? sorry, I had to mention why this is RFC: I simply don't know about the details of the xhci-mtk internals. It was okay from my tests with mt8173 and I think this will be harmless as this is "better than before". But when I removed get_esit_boundary(), I really have no idea why it was there. I'm wondering if there was another reason of that function other than just preventing out-of-bounds. Maybe chunfeng can answer this? Thanks! > > thanks, > > greg k-h _______________________________________________ Linux-mediatek mailing list Linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mediatek From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17B22C4338F for ; Mon, 9 Aug 2021 09:44:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A667F60D07 for ; Mon, 9 Aug 2021 09:44:07 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org A667F60D07 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=chromium.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:Cc:To:Subject:Message-ID:Date:From: In-Reply-To:References:MIME-Version:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=honHSIJGC/kiCjrhSe8FZOeSzeJ+n/52Mgh61/UDQlc=; b=Z7krCEyI0rl8D0 4m1Vt3uuopZai5H/UaTqwMyLxwPs6lxxLdvvCKlZowAKZ823RnahgENNyZ02trihYF78PpkRS4pJ4 zmrKqihjklEZ15KrGVnPzbdrQ1GniuAASmOMvClngFvTOLoxOgXKVcyVrlDFpzUTIAW3uHGk0UCj4 d9CaFmyvDFoi3iPnGWmF0dvXY+nHUzZAp2mh1e28sYDMA7NtF1b/la1Sfyp5/dWFY4bgr/rZ76LQt aVmCrg8XUNRH2wnKeJEKTPONIc85iU4sz9dt/kJyswcMCv+Z5zB6giTDx9+qhxARX0bQ4EKszXfKp F1RV9bKsZK5zM/KrLKHw==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1mD1nZ-0003Ly-Sb; Mon, 09 Aug 2021 09:42:22 +0000 Received: from mail-pl1-x634.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::634]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1mD1nV-0003Ka-1S for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 09 Aug 2021 09:42:18 +0000 Received: by mail-pl1-x634.google.com with SMTP id c16so15738456plh.7 for ; Mon, 09 Aug 2021 02:42:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chromium.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=A+KAi3dOJuuXd/Qn6cacTVo6xH3AW7xPjOFYRrz7Uok=; b=HymP0PD2B0cGVjnMKzIUkUNnIY+q8voQCdep9RSZJP0rhHG+lzU47AL/ksz8la8qDT ROPMbY8e9eOtI20PzVcxAUx7Z2MOEU0oxI5YdRQlekp97dEmylrRvQrzzmpiHwOK2CdZ 0+e/b0xFJgPZRRRdDWQ1rAhnthQkeuCeTmaKQ= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=A+KAi3dOJuuXd/Qn6cacTVo6xH3AW7xPjOFYRrz7Uok=; b=U2OpB0XTvEOKV07qu7KTarzPnxqxEVs83+jqJPJOIQntNFHxwXGNtIYhyWXtnTm+RU VPa6mGzog6NbyRpq6vQBbPDOd48aWAJPwtRTI+1jZz9fNaMoS7xile+N7WQCuOpoEUr7 mPFH0CmScZWu0Mu7eiHIFbHKMxuSJZtKGnTiOjrMDb3wc6FwL0dS1DctOna/V60bMnNT exsAjcfn9C0LgLbujJ00Mp58WM932uJ5fbITiFHuzR2xnYAiqaOxf0G+EL1GS75zwQUc ZEy6sP8pegXznoQ1P3gVcx9Z5LQy4RutAAmqgBYV/bwslDEUAMWgCI+v9c+bV1vtAeDX j+qQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531wiD4usUP7unQookmHY60COaMwY2zNjBbOnaqhKXkEG92erdkI DDxDx0j+mUUSm5H+OiRxKCZVVvpTMhnqC+MURmiCYw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwRNv1bYkHAya2aLwiLdoTT5Z3Wow97kzaNiR834PT5Mj0uvowBEIf7DGlFoiv/Uu/Nnd6z8yYjrp74f4fs4XI= X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:102:: with SMTP id p2mr674822pjz.126.1628502135890; Mon, 09 Aug 2021 02:42:15 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210809165904.RFC.1.I5165a4a8da5cac23c9928b1ec3c3a1a7383b7c23@changeid> In-Reply-To: From: Ikjoon Jang Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2021 17:42:05 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] usb: xhci-mtk: handle bandwidth table rollover To: Greg Kroah-Hartman Cc: linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, Chunfeng Yun , "moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support" , Matthias Brugger , open list , "moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support" , Mathias Nyman X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20210809_024217_147783_AE16DA4C X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 20.40 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 5:11 PM Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 09, 2021 at 04:59:29PM +0800, Ikjoon Jang wrote: > > xhci-mtk has 64 slots for periodic bandwidth calculations and each > > slot represents byte budgets on a microframe. When an endpoint's > > allocation sits on the boundary of the table, byte budgets' slot > > should be rolled over but the current implementation doesn't. > > > > This patch applies a 6 bits mask to the microframe index to handle > > its rollover 64 slots and prevent out-of-bounds array access. > > > > Signed-off-by: Ikjoon Jang > > --- > > > > drivers/usb/host/xhci-mtk-sch.c | 79 +++++++++------------------------ > > drivers/usb/host/xhci-mtk.h | 1 + > > 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 57 deletions(-) > > Why is this "RFC"? What needs to be addressed in this change before it > can be accepted? sorry, I had to mention why this is RFC: I simply don't know about the details of the xhci-mtk internals. It was okay from my tests with mt8173 and I think this will be harmless as this is "better than before". But when I removed get_esit_boundary(), I really have no idea why it was there. I'm wondering if there was another reason of that function other than just preventing out-of-bounds. Maybe chunfeng can answer this? Thanks! > > thanks, > > greg k-h _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel