At Thu, 26 Sep 2013 10:25:13 +0200,
Takashi Iwai wrote:
>
> At Thu, 26 Sep 2013 08:54:25 +0100,
> Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 09:51:23AM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > sorry for the lat response, as I've been traveling in the last weeks.
> >
At Thu, 26 Sep 2013 08:54:25 +0100,
Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 09:51:23AM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > sorry for the lat response, as I've been traveling in the last weeks.
> >
> > At Thu, 19 Sep 2013 22:53:02 +0100,
> > Russell King wrote:
> > >
>
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 09:51:23AM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> Hi,
>
> sorry for the lat response, as I've been traveling in the last weeks.
>
> At Thu, 19 Sep 2013 22:53:02 +0100,
> Russell King wrote:
> >
> > This code sequence is unsafe in modules:
> >
> > static u64 mask = DMA_BIT_MASK(som
Hi,
sorry for the lat response, as I've been traveling in the last weeks.
At Thu, 19 Sep 2013 22:53:02 +0100,
Russell King wrote:
>
> This code sequence is unsafe in modules:
>
> static u64 mask = DMA_BIT_MASK(something);
> ...
> if (!dev->dma_mask)
> dev->dma_mask = &mask;
On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 10:53:02PM +0100, Russell King wrote:
> This code sequence is unsafe in modules:
>
> static u64 mask = DMA_BIT_MASK(something);
> ...
> if (!dev->dma_mask)
> dev->dma_mask = &mask;
Acked-by: Mark Brown
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
This code sequence is unsafe in modules:
static u64 mask = DMA_BIT_MASK(something);
...
if (!dev->dma_mask)
dev->dma_mask = &mask;
as if a module is reloaded, the mask will be pointing at the original
module's mask address, and this can lead to oopses. Moreover, they
all
