From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alex Williamson Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2015 18:28:58 +0000 Subject: Re: [patch] vfio: make an array larger Message-Id: <1446661738.3692.129.camel@redhat.com> List-Id: References: <20151104132624.GC20966@mwanda> <1446656080.3692.112.camel@redhat.com> <20151104182022.GJ7289@mwanda> In-Reply-To: <20151104182022.GJ7289@mwanda> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Dan Carpenter Cc: Frank Blaschka , kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2015-11-04 at 21:20 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > Sorry, I should have said that I am on linux-next at the start. > > > > -static u8 pci_cap_length[] = { > > > +static u8 pci_cap_length[PCI_CAP_ID_MAX + 1] = { > > > [PCI_CAP_ID_BASIC] = PCI_STD_HEADER_SIZEOF, /* pci config header */ > > > [PCI_CAP_ID_PM] = PCI_PM_SIZEOF, > > > [PCI_CAP_ID_AGP] = PCI_AGP_SIZEOF, > > > > This doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. The last entry we define > > is: > > > > [PCI_CAP_ID_AF] = PCI_CAP_AF_SIZEOF, > > Yes. > > > }; > > > > and PCI_CAP_ID_MAX is defined as: > > > > #define PCI_CAP_ID_MAX PCI_CAP_ID_AF > > No. I am on linux-next and we appear to have added a new element > beyond PCI_CAP_ID_AF. > > #define PCI_CAP_ID_AF 0x13 /* PCI Advanced Features */ > #define PCI_CAP_ID_EA 0x14 /* PCI Enhanced Allocation */ > #define PCI_CAP_ID_MAX PCI_CAP_ID_EA > > > > > So the array is implicitly sized to PCI_CAP_ID_MAX + 1 already, this > > doesn't make it any larger. > > In linux-next it makes it larger. But also explicitly using > PCI_CAP_ID_MAX + 1 is cleaner as well as fixing the bug in case we add > more elements later again. Ok, all the pieces line up now. Please add mention of that to the commit log and I'll look for the respin including the same for pci_ext_cap_length. Thanks for spotting this! Alex