On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 01:20:29 -0700 Yinghai Lu <[email protected]> wrote:
> [PATCH] x86: check boundary in count/setup_resource called by get_current_resources
>
> need to check info->res_num less than PCI_BUS_NUM_RESOURCES, so
> info->bus->resource[info->res_num] = res will not beyond of bus resource array
> when acpi resutrn too many resource entries.
>
Isn't this a bit of a problem? It sounds like PCI_BUS_NUM_RESOURCES is to
small for that system? If so, some sort of dynamic allocation might be
needed.
>
> Index: linux-2.6/arch/x86/pci/acpi.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.orig/arch/x86/pci/acpi.c
> +++ linux-2.6/arch/x86/pci/acpi.c
> @@ -77,9 +77,13 @@ count_resource(struct acpi_resource *acp
> struct acpi_resource_address64 addr;
> acpi_status status;
>
> + if (info->res_num >= PCI_BUS_NUM_RESOURCES)
> + return AE_OK;
> +
> status = resource_to_addr(acpi_res, &addr);
> if (ACPI_SUCCESS(status))
> info->res_num++;
> +
> return AE_OK;
> }
grump. I don't know why people like a blank line before `return': it's
just a waste of screen space. And the surrounding code in
arch/x86/pci/acpi.c doesn't do this either.
> @@ -93,6 +97,9 @@ setup_resource(struct acpi_resource *acp
> unsigned long flags;
> struct resource *root;
>
> + if (info->res_num >= PCI_BUS_NUM_RESOURCES)
> + return AE_OK;
And should we really be silently ignoring this problem? Should we at least
report it?
> status = resource_to_addr(acpi_res, &addr);
> if (!ACPI_SUCCESS(status))
> return AE_OK;
>
-
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]
