Ingo Oeser wrote:
On Monday 30 January 2006 08:04, Tejun Heo wrote:
I object. Using array is intentional. Slave aware controllers (PATA /
ata_piix) will use [0..1], most SATA controllers will use only [0], and
PM aware ones will use [0..15]. The intention was requiring low level
drivers of only what they know and normalize them in the core layer.
eg. Current std SATA reset routines consider the argument as *class (a
single class value) and it's intentional. As long as a lldd is aware of
only one device per port, it's allowed/recommeded to consider the passed
classes argument as a pointer to single class value. The rest is upto
the core libata layer.
But what you pass along is basically an unbounded array, which is
a bug waiting to happen.
Hello, again.
I'm a little bit lost here.
So, are you saying....
struct ata_classes {
unsigned int classes[2];
|;
is safer than
unsigned int *class;
?
So please let the core layer pass a bounded array here or provide
a function from core layer to set that and check the index.
Can you show me what you have in mind as code?
--
tejun
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
