>Ah, yes, that looks wrong. Looks like the check for (seg > 255) came >from the original pci_sal_read(). The original pci_sal_ext_read() did >check for (seg > 65535). My bad. > >Thanks for catching this. So you (and Matthew Wilcox) are advocating this change? ===== arch/ia64/pci/pci.c 1.66 vs edited ===== --- 1.66/arch/ia64/pci/pci.c 2005-01-22 14:42:51 -08:00 +++ edited/arch/ia64/pci/pci.c 2005-01-25 12:42:49 -08:00 @@ -71,7 +71,7 @@ u64 addr, mode, data = 0; int result = 0; - if ((seg > 255) || (bus > 255) || (devfn > 255) || (reg > 4095)) + if ((seg > 65535) || (bus > 255) || (devfn > 255) || (reg > 4095)) return -EINVAL; if ((seg | reg) <= 255) { "seg", "bus", etc. are all "int" ... should we be extra paranoid and check for negative values (or change the definitions to unsigned), or is that over the top? -Tony - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.htmlReceived on Tue Jan 25 15:51:52 2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-08-02 09:20:35 EST