Hi Fabio, On Wed, 12 Feb 2014 12:43:02 -0200, Fabio Estevam <feste...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Hector Palacios > <hector.palac...@digi.com> wrote: > > The calloc() call was allocating space for the sizeof the struct > > pointer rather than for the struct contents. > > > > Signed-off-by: Hector Palacios <hector.palac...@digi.com> > > --- > > disk/part_efi.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/disk/part_efi.c b/disk/part_efi.c > > index 5dfaf490c89a..7fabec059d7a 100644 > > --- a/disk/part_efi.c > > +++ b/disk/part_efi.c > > @@ -232,7 +232,7 @@ static int set_protective_mbr(block_dev_desc_t > > *dev_desc) > > legacy_mbr *p_mbr; > > > > /* Setup the Protective MBR */ > > - p_mbr = calloc(1, sizeof(p_mbr)); > > + p_mbr = calloc(1, sizeof(legacy_mbr)); > > What about: > > p_mbr = calloc(1, sizeof(*p_mbr)) ? I don't like the idea of setting p_mbr based on *p_mbr at a time where p_mbr is still undefined. I know that from a C standard perspective this is ok, but I'd rather simply not run any risk and pass sizeof the struct type, not a (non-existent) dereferenced 'value'. > Regards, > > Fabio Estevam Amicalement, -- Albert. _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot