From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ferruh Yigit Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/szedata2: fix incorrect device memory access Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 15:11:26 +0000 Message-ID: References: <1485254992-12545-1-git-send-email-vido@cesnet.cz> <89bf9fb7-9101-2ff4-c4bf-8075424b6165@cesnet.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org To: Matej Vido Return-path: Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF4792BD1 for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2017 16:11:28 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <89bf9fb7-9101-2ff4-c4bf-8075424b6165@cesnet.cz> List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On 1/24/2017 2:02 PM, Matej Vido wrote: > On 24.01.2017 12:58, Ferruh Yigit wrote: >> On 1/24/2017 10:49 AM, Matej Vido wrote: >>> Fixes: 8acba705b119 ("net/szedata2: localize handling of PCI resources") >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Matej Vido >> Unrelated from this patch, in maintainers file, you have your other mail >> address: "Matej Vido ", do you want to update it? > Hi Ferruh, > > yes, I will send the patch. >> >>> --- >>> drivers/net/szedata2/rte_eth_szedata2.h | 2 +- >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/net/szedata2/rte_eth_szedata2.h b/drivers/net/szedata2/rte_eth_szedata2.h >>> index b58adb6..afe8a38 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/net/szedata2/rte_eth_szedata2.h >>> +++ b/drivers/net/szedata2/rte_eth_szedata2.h >>> @@ -192,7 +192,7 @@ struct szedata { >>> } >>> >>> #define SZEDATA2_PCI_RESOURCE_PTR(rsc, offset, type) \ >>> - ((type)((uint8_t *)(rsc)->addr) + (offset)) >>> + ((type)(((uint8_t *)(rsc)->addr) + (offset))) >> Although output will be same, (in all uses, type is a pointer), Of course won't be same, please forget about it J, I am confused. So these two differs a lot, taking into account that offset numbers used are big numbers (0x8000..), it should be accessing very unrelated addresses. So how this was working before? > this >> seems the intention, so: >> >> Reviewed-by: Ferruh Yigit >> >> btw, following will do same, right, not sure if it is better: >> ((type)(rsc)->addr + (offset)) > This is also wrong. The intention of the macro is to add an offset to > the base address and typecast the result. > > Regards, > Matej >> >>> >>> enum szedata2_link_speed { >>> SZEDATA2_LINK_SPEED_DEFAULT = 0, >>> >