On Tue, Aug 20, 2024 at 5:15 AM Ivan T. Ivanov <iiva...@suse.de> wrote: > > On 08-18 12:27, Ivan T. Ivanov wrote: > > > > > > > > 3) It appears the response to the GET_DEVICE_ID command, though a > > > response is returned, is not valid. The right way to handle this would > > > be to do more validation in the ssif_detect() function. It doesn't do > > > any validation of the response data, and that's really what needs to be > > > done. > > > > > > > do_cmd() in ssif_detect() already do validation. Perhaps, > > ssif_probe() should just not return ENODEV in case of error. > > > > Oh, I wanted to say ssif_detect, not ssif_probe.
Yeah, that's probably the right solution. I'll look at this a bit. But I see the problem. Do you want to do a patch, or do you want me to? -corey _______________________________________________ Openipmi-developer mailing list Openipmi-developer@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openipmi-developer
