Hi Marc, Sorry, absolutely It was my mistake sending the same patch second time.
On 03/17/2016 10:34 AM, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On 17/03/16 15:18, Shanker Donthineni wrote: >> We are not checking whether the requested device identifier fits into >> the device table memory or not. The function its_create_device() >> assumes that enough memory has been allocated for whole DevID space >> (reported by ITS_TYPER.Devbits) during the ITS probe() and continues >> to initialize ITS hardware. >> >> This assumption is not perfect, sometimes we reduce memory size either >> because of its size crossing MAX_ORDER-1 or BASERn max size limit. The >> MAPD command fails if 'Device ID' is outside of device table range. >> >> Add a simple validation check to avoid MAPD failures since we are >> not handling ITS command errors. This change also helps to return an >> error -ENOMEM instead of success to caller. >> >> Signed-off-by: Shanker Donthineni <[email protected]> > Is there any difference between this patch and the one you posted on > March 10th? > > Thanks, > > M. -- Shanker Donthineni Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
