Re: Question about implementation of __qbuf_dmabuf() in videobuf2-core.c

2014-05-05 Thread Hans Verkuil
On 04/29/2014 07:27 PM, n179911 wrote: > Hi, > > Is there a work around for this bug without upgrading to 3.16 kernel? > > Is it safe to manually set the length to be data_offset + size + 1 to make > sure > > planes[plane].length is greater than planes[plane].data_offset + >

Re: Question about implementation of __qbuf_dmabuf() in videobuf2-core.c

2014-04-29 Thread n179911
Hi, Is there a work around for this bug without upgrading to 3.16 kernel? Is it safe to manually set the length to be data_offset + size + 1 to make sure planes[plane].length is greater than planes[plane].data_offset + q->plane_sizes[plane]? Thank you. On Wed, Apr 23, 2014

Re: Question about implementation of __qbuf_dmabuf() in videobuf2-core.c

2014-04-23 Thread Hans Verkuil
On 04/23/2014 02:18 AM, n179911 wrote: > In __qbuf_dmabuf(), it check the length and size of the buffer being > queued, like this: > http://lxr.free-electrons.com/source/drivers/media/v4l2-core/videobuf2-core.c#L1158 > > My question is why the range check is liked this: > > 1158 if (planes[plane

Question about implementation of __qbuf_dmabuf() in videobuf2-core.c

2014-04-22 Thread n179911
In __qbuf_dmabuf(), it check the length and size of the buffer being queued, like this: http://lxr.free-electrons.com/source/drivers/media/v4l2-core/videobuf2-core.c#L1158 My question is why the range check is liked this: 1158 if (planes[plane].length < planes[plane].data_offset + 1159