Re: [PATCH 3/3] staging: wilc1000: Remove unnecessary array index check

On Sun, 6 May 2018 00:33:33 -0700 Nathan Chancellor <natechancel...@gmail.com> wrote: > This statment triggers GCC's -Wtype-limit since key_index is an > unsigned integer so it cannot be less than zero. > > Signed-off-by: Nathan Chancellor <natechancel...@gmail.com>

Re: [PATCH 3/3] staging: wilc1000: Remove unnecessary array index check

On Sun, 6 May 2018 00:33:33 -0700 Nathan Chancellor wrote: > This statment triggers GCC's -Wtype-limit since key_index is an > unsigned integer so it cannot be less than zero. > > Signed-off-by: Nathan Chancellor Reviewed-by: Ajay Singh > --- > driver

Re: [PATCH 2/3] staging: wilc1000: Remove useless function

ne if statement. > > Signed-off-by: Nathan Chancellor <natechancel...@gmail.com> Reviewed-by: Ajay Singh <ajay.kat...@microchip.com> > --- > drivers/staging/wilc1000/host_interface.c | 12 > drivers/staging/wilc1000/host_interface.h

Re: [PATCH 2/3] staging: wilc1000: Remove useless function

-off-by: Nathan Chancellor Reviewed-by: Ajay Singh > --- > drivers/staging/wilc1000/host_interface.c | 12 > drivers/staging/wilc1000/host_interface.h | 1 - > drivers/staging/wilc1000/wilc_wfi_cfgoperations.c | 14 +- > 3 files changed,

Re: [PATCH 1/3] staging: wilc1000: Remove unused variables

Thank you for the patch series. On Sun, 6 May 2018 00:33:31 -0700 Nathan Chancellor <natechancel...@gmail.com> wrote: > GCC warns these variables are all set but never used so remove them. > > Signed-off-by: Nathan Chancellor <natechancel...@gmail.com> Reviewed-by:

Re: [PATCH 1/3] staging: wilc1000: Remove unused variables

Thank you for the patch series. On Sun, 6 May 2018 00:33:31 -0700 Nathan Chancellor wrote: > GCC warns these variables are all set but never used so remove them. > > Signed-off-by: Nathan Chancellor Reviewed-by: Ajay Singh > --- > drivers/staging/wilc1000/host_interface

Re: [PATCH] staging: wilc1000: fix infinite loop and out-of-bounds access

On Wed, 2 May 2018 11:39:36 +0300 Dan Carpenter wrote: > We're mainly discussing readability, right? > > To me when people use "int" that tells me as a reader that we don't > need to think about the type. It's going to be a small number. > > Say you have data which

Re: [PATCH] staging: wilc1000: fix infinite loop and out-of-bounds access

On Wed, 2 May 2018 11:39:36 +0300 Dan Carpenter wrote: > We're mainly discussing readability, right? > > To me when people use "int" that tells me as a reader that we don't > need to think about the type. It's going to be a small number. > > Say you have data which the user can control, then

Re: [PATCH] staging: wilc1000: fix infinite loop and out-of-bounds access

On Mon, 30 Apr 2018 18:23:21 +0300 Dan Carpenter <dan.carpen...@oracle.com> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 07:59:16PM +0530, Ajay Singh wrote: > > Reviewed-by: Ajay Singh <ajay.kat...@microchip.com> > > > > On Mon, 30 Apr 2018 07:50:40 -0500 > > "

Re: [PATCH] staging: wilc1000: fix infinite loop and out-of-bounds access

On Mon, 30 Apr 2018 18:23:21 +0300 Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 07:59:16PM +0530, Ajay Singh wrote: > > Reviewed-by: Ajay Singh > > > > On Mon, 30 Apr 2018 07:50:40 -0500 > > "Gustavo A. R. Silva" wrote: > > > > > If i

Re: [PATCH] staging: wilc1000: fix infinite loop and out-of-bounds access

Reviewed-by: Ajay Singh <ajay.kat...@microchip.com> On Mon, 30 Apr 2018 07:50:40 -0500 "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gust...@embeddedor.com> wrote: > If i < slot_id is initially true then it will remain true. Also, > as i is being decremented it will end up accessing m

Re: [PATCH] staging: wilc1000: fix infinite loop and out-of-bounds access

Reviewed-by: Ajay Singh On Mon, 30 Apr 2018 07:50:40 -0500 "Gustavo A. R. Silva" wrote: > If i < slot_id is initially true then it will remain true. Also, > as i is being decremented it will end up accessing memory out of > bounds. > > Fix this by incrementing

Re: [PATCH] staging: wilc1000: replace kmalloc + memcpy with kmemdup

On Mon, 26 Mar 2018 18:16:29 +0100 Colin King wrote: > From: Colin Ian King > > Replace several allocation and memcpys with kmemdup and add in some > missing memory allocation failure checks. Also fix an incorrect > -EFAULT return with

Re: [PATCH] staging: wilc1000: replace kmalloc + memcpy with kmemdup

On Mon, 26 Mar 2018 18:16:29 +0100 Colin King wrote: > From: Colin Ian King > > Replace several allocation and memcpys with kmemdup and add in some > missing memory allocation failure checks. Also fix an incorrect > -EFAULT return with -ENOMEM. > > Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King > --- >

Re: [PATCH] staging: wilc1000: check for kmalloc allocation failures

Thanks for submitting the patch. On Wed, 21 Mar 2018 13:03:18 -0700 Joe Perches wrote: > On Wed, 2018-03-21 at 19:19 +, Colin King wrote: > > From: Colin Ian King > > > > There are three kmalloc allocations that are not null checked which > >

Re: [PATCH] staging: wilc1000: check for kmalloc allocation failures

Thanks for submitting the patch. On Wed, 21 Mar 2018 13:03:18 -0700 Joe Perches wrote: > On Wed, 2018-03-21 at 19:19 +, Colin King wrote: > > From: Colin Ian King > > > > There are three kmalloc allocations that are not null checked which > > potentially could lead to null pointer

Re: [PATCH 6/7] staging: wilc1000: remove unwanted braces and correct code alignment

On Wed, 14 Mar 2018 18:15:04 +0530 wrote: > From: HariPrasath Elango > > Remove the unwated brace and corrected the code block alignment > accordingly Changes done in this patch are already taken care. Today, Greg has applied the

Re: [PATCH 6/7] staging: wilc1000: remove unwanted braces and correct code alignment

On Wed, 14 Mar 2018 18:15:04 +0530 wrote: > From: HariPrasath Elango > > Remove the unwated brace and corrected the code block alignment > accordingly Changes done in this patch are already taken care. Today, Greg has applied the patch which had these changes. This patch can be ignore from

Re: [PATCHv2] staging: wilc1000: use pre-defined macro is_broadcast_ether_addr

On Tue, 13 Mar 2018 10:58:16 +0100 Greg Kroah-Hartman <gre...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 01:00:51PM +0530, Ajay Singh wrote: > > > > Reviewed-by: Ajay Singh <ajay.kat...@microchip.com> > > > > On Mon, 12 Mar 2018 15:09:03 +0530 &

Re: [PATCHv2] staging: wilc1000: use pre-defined macro is_broadcast_ether_addr

On Tue, 13 Mar 2018 10:58:16 +0100 Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 01:00:51PM +0530, Ajay Singh wrote: > > > > Reviewed-by: Ajay Singh > > > > On Mon, 12 Mar 2018 15:09:03 +0530 > > wrote: > > > > > From: HariPrasath El

Re: [PATCH] staging: wilc1000: use kmemdup instead of kmalloc and memcpy

On Tue, 13 Mar 2018 11:50:48 +0530 <hariprasath.ela...@gmail.com> wrote: > From: HariPrasath Elango <hariprasath.ela...@gmail.com> > > Kmalloc followed by memcpy can be replaced by kmemdup. > > Signed-off-by: HariPrasath Elango <hariprasath.ela...@gmail.com>

Re: [PATCH] staging: wilc1000: use kmemdup instead of kmalloc and memcpy

On Tue, 13 Mar 2018 11:50:48 +0530 wrote: > From: HariPrasath Elango > > Kmalloc followed by memcpy can be replaced by kmemdup. > > Signed-off-by: HariPrasath Elango Reviewed-by: Ajay Singh Regards, Ajay

Re: [PATCH] staging: wilc1000: Destroy mutex object in deinitialization

On Mon, 12 Mar 2018 18:49:49 +0530 <hariprasath.ela...@gmail.com> wrote: > From: HariPrasath Elango <hariprasath.ela...@gmail.com> > > Destroy the mutex object that is initialized in wlan_init_locks() > > Signed-off-by: HariPrasath Elango <hariprasath.ela...@gmail

Re: [PATCH] staging: wilc1000: Destroy mutex object in deinitialization

On Mon, 12 Mar 2018 18:49:49 +0530 wrote: > From: HariPrasath Elango > > Destroy the mutex object that is initialized in wlan_init_locks() > > Signed-off-by: HariPrasath Elango Reviewed-by: Ajay Singh Regards, Ajay

Re: [PATCH] staging: wilc1000: Fix code block alignment

asath.ela...@gmail.com> Reviewed-by: Ajay Singh <ajay.kat...@microchip.com> Regards, Ajay

Re: [PATCH] staging: wilc1000: Fix code block alignment

On Mon, 12 Mar 2018 18:30:44 +0530 wrote: > From: HariPrasath Elango > > Fix the code alignment for a block of code to adhere to coding > guidelines > > Signed-off-by: HariPrasath Elango Reviewed-by: Ajay Singh Regards, Ajay

Re: [PATCHv2] staging: wilc1000: use pre-defined macro is_broadcast_ether_addr

Reviewed-by: Ajay Singh <ajay.kat...@microchip.com> On Mon, 12 Mar 2018 15:09:03 +0530 <hariprasath.ela...@gmail.com> wrote: > From: HariPrasath Elango <hariprasath.ela...@gmail.com> > Please avoid use of 'From' tag specially when there is only one 'Signed-off-by'

Re: [PATCHv2] staging: wilc1000: use pre-defined macro is_broadcast_ether_addr

Reviewed-by: Ajay Singh On Mon, 12 Mar 2018 15:09:03 +0530 wrote: > From: HariPrasath Elango > Please avoid use of 'From' tag specially when there is only one 'Signed-off-by' tag and its same. > Use the kernel pre-defined macro is_broadcast_ether_addr() instead of > doing a

RE: kernel porting query

1) Can any one please shed some light on precisely and exactly what are differences in different boards for which we need to port linux? The differences depends on the boards ... Mostly if they belong to the same family the differences could be mainly in the peripherials ... Interrupt

RE: kernel porting query

snip 1) Can any one please shed some light on precisely and exactly what are differences in different boards for which we need to port linux? The differences depends on the boards ... Mostly if they belong to the same family the differences could be mainly in the peripherials ... Interrupt