From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix, from userid 118) id 85D3CE00509; Wed, 25 Jun 2014 09:22:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on yocto-www.yoctoproject.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-HAM-Report: * -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0000] * -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low * trust * [209.85.220.42 listed in list.dnswl.org] Received: from mail-pa0-f42.google.com (mail-pa0-f42.google.com [209.85.220.42]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6140DE003D8 for ; Wed, 25 Jun 2014 09:22:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pa0-f42.google.com with SMTP id lj1so1937395pab.29 for ; Wed, 25 Jun 2014 09:22:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=8q45q1hGCo+WxzcfZFDYFREHP7Fb25eSclqCDGWhbTI=; b=X/lo36BT4BANX1eAx7Jb/QZduA45W+sUVVi6KbUQfebOpI5Zv0EQaM6vQekQ5MDTYi hf/pAueAAZc7NLE5Mf6LKMvIGHooydXOjPbRJgfldDnrH6KzxHiW9qwUviOtActGd3t/ fQ7YOAFV8poW/8DsIVU1268K5as4klYifNENPrLsEbBNxVGS2u6b8tJ0nnt1LPwEeACB PtoqcXKUzymbvPd9UYldHu9ie4Mjd0wpo/KK+J3KM5c6mDRJxDxR09YpM5P1NfXGu8vo d/0YR7GLehLpTPlp0k4+wDArXoo0TojAPambKVjYPrEFslDPlPmE81+DLWuQqwlti8kN eiIQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlfQ0UFb8CfMWnDj1Y15ZkiXMvOGpqxrU5yAzfD6q2hIflguYT/8x26zKFxxu9PSgUo1xib X-Received: by 10.66.228.133 with SMTP id si5mr13554059pac.48.1403713345322; Wed, 25 Jun 2014 09:22:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.11] ([63.226.49.26]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id py7sm5931555pbb.78.2014.06.25.09.22.23 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 25 Jun 2014 09:22:24 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <53AAF73D.70308@boundarydevices.com> Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 09:22:21 -0700 From: Eric Nelson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Otavio Salvador , Lauren Post References: <1403373168-4986-1-git-send-email-eric.nelson@boundarydevices.com> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Cc: "meta-freescale@yoctoproject.org" Subject: Re: [meta-fsl-arm][PATCH] imx-vpu: fix checks of IOGetVirtMem() return value X-BeenThere: meta-freescale@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Usage and development list for the meta-fsl-* layers List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 16:22:31 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 06/25/2014 09:18 AM, Otavio Salvador wrote: > Hello Eric, > Hello Lauren, > > On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 2:52 PM, Eric Nelson > wrote: >> The IOGetVirtMem() routine returns the address of a memory block >> or -1 (MAP_FAILED) to indicate an error. >> >> Many callers of this routine tested the return value for <= 0 >> to detect failure, and at least with a 3G/1G memory split >> configured in the kernel, a negative number (!= -1) is a >> valid (successful) return value. >> >> Without this patch, the IOSystemInit() will often detect >> failure incorrectly. >> >> Signed-off-by: Eric Nelson > > Eric, you forgot the add the upstream-status field as: > > diff --git a/recipes-bsp/imx-vpu/imx-vpu/0001-IOGetVirtMem-returns-1-MAP_FAILED-on-failure.patch > b/recipes-bsp/imx-vpu/imx-vpu/0001-IOGetVirtMem-returns-1-MAP_FAILED-on-failure.patch > index 26826ba..348a536 100644 > --- a/recipes-bsp/imx-vpu/imx-vpu/0001-IOGetVirtMem-returns-1-MAP_FAILED-on-failure.patch > +++ b/recipes-bsp/imx-vpu/imx-vpu/0001-IOGetVirtMem-returns-1-MAP_FAILED-on-failure.patch > @@ -3,6 +3,8 @@ From: Eric Nelson > Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 19:42:38 -0700 > Subject: [PATCH] IOGetVirtMem returns -1 (MAP_FAILED) on failure > > +Upstream-Status: Pending > + > Signed-off-by: Eric Nelson > --- > vpu/vpu_io.c | 2 +- > > I have done it here, so no need to resend it but please do it next time. > Thanks Otavio. > Lauren, this patch should be reviewed internally. > This should be a quick scan, since the routines are pretty simple. Regards, Eric