Hi,
[This is an automated email]
This commit has been processed because it contains a "Fixes:" tag,
fixing commit: 31eca76ba2fc nfit, libnvdimm: limited/whitelisted dimm command
marshaling mechanism.
The bot has tested the following trees: v4.20.2, v4.19.15, v4.14.93, v4.9.150.
v4.20.2:
Dan Williams writes:
> On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 8:43 AM Dan Williams wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 7:19 AM Jeff Moyer wrote:
> [..]
>> > > +
>> > > + if (cmd == ND_CMD_CALL) {
>> > > + int i;
>> > > +
>> > > + if (call_pkg && nfit_mem->family !=
On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 8:43 AM Dan Williams wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 7:19 AM Jeff Moyer wrote:
[..]
> > > +
> > > + if (cmd == ND_CMD_CALL) {
> > > + int i;
> > > +
> > > + if (call_pkg && nfit_mem->family != call_pkg->nd_family)
> > > +
On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 7:19 AM Jeff Moyer wrote:
>
> Dan Williams writes:
>
> > The _DSM function number validation only happens to succeed when the
> > generic Linux command number translation corresponds with a
> > DSM-family-specific function number. This breaks NVDIMM-N
> > implementations
Dan Williams writes:
> The _DSM function number validation only happens to succeed when the
> generic Linux command number translation corresponds with a
> DSM-family-specific function number. This breaks NVDIMM-N
> implementations that correctly implement _LSR, _LSW, and _LSI, but do
> not
Hi Dan,
On 12-Jan-19 5:29 AM, Dan Williams wrote:
The _DSM function number validation only happens to succeed when the
generic Linux command number translation corresponds with a
DSM-family-specific function number. This breaks NVDIMM-N
implementations that correctly implement _LSR, _LSW, and
On Fri, 2019-01-11 at 15:59 -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
> The _DSM function number validation only happens to succeed when the
> generic Linux command number translation corresponds with a
> DSM-family-specific function number. This breaks NVDIMM-N
> implementations that correctly implement _LSR,
