On Tue, 09 Dec 2008 09:16:50 -0600 Timur Tabi <ti...@freescale.com> wrote:
> Guillaume Knispel wrote: > > > blk = NULL; at the end of the loop is what is done in the more used > > rh_alloc_align(), so for consistency either we change both or we use > > the same construction here. > > I also think that testing for &info->free_list is harder to understand > > because you must have the linked list implementation in your head > > (which a kernel developer should anyway so this is not so important) > > Fair enough. > > Acked-by: Timur Tabi <ti...@freescale.com> > Kumar, can this go into your tree ? (copying the patch under so you have it at hand) There is an error in rh_alloc_fixed() of the Remote Heap code: If there is at least one free block blk won't be NULL at the end of the search loop, so -ENOMEM won't be returned and the else branch of "if (bs == s || be == e)" will be taken, corrupting the management structures. Signed-off-by: Guillaume Knispel <gknis...@proformatique.com> --- Fix an error in rh_alloc_fixed() that made allocations succeed when they should fail, and corrupted management structures. diff --git a/arch/powerpc/lib/rheap.c b/arch/powerpc/lib/rheap.c index 29b2941..45907c1 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/lib/rheap.c +++ b/arch/powerpc/lib/rheap.c @@ -556,6 +556,7 @@ unsigned long rh_alloc_fixed(rh_info_t * info, unsigned long start, int size, co be = blk->start + blk->size; if (s >= bs && e <= be) break; + blk = NULL; } if (blk == NULL) -- Guillaume KNISPEL _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev