On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 06:34:18PM +0200, Henrik Rydberg wrote: > > >>One thing I have seen in all logs is the earlier "send_byte fail" > > >>message, so > > >>I think that is a pre-requisite. > > > > > >Not necessarily - it could be that the patch actually fixes the root > > >cause. One possible scenario is that on recent SMCs, some of the > > >commands produce more data than we actually read. This would > > >eventually lead to both data corruption and overflow somwhere in the > > >SMC internals. If the original SMC error is interpreted as a read > > >buffer overflow, then that problem should be fixed with this patch. > > > > > > > Good point. > > > > But shouldn't we at least get the "flushed %d bytes" warning message in > > this case ? > > The explanation I have there is that the (newer) SMC needs the > application to read the 'no more bytes' or it will get confused. It > makes sense, if the number of bytes to read is no longer specified. > You mean that just reading from APPLESMC_CMD_PORT would solve the problem ? That might make sense.
Thanks, Guenter -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
