From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Scott Wood Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] booke: Added ONE_REG interface for IAC/DAC debug registers Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2012 11:02:05 -0500 Message-ID: <500D757D.3030305@freescale.com> References: <1343042364-30869-1-git-send-email-Bharat.Bhushan@freescale.com> <500D70C9.2080609@freescale.com> <6A3DF150A5B70D4F9B66A25E3F7C888D03DD59C8@039-SN2MPN1-023.039d.mgd.msft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Wood Scott-B07421 , "kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org" , "agraf@suse.de" , "kvm@vger.kernel.org" To: Bhushan Bharat-R65777 Return-path: In-Reply-To: <6A3DF150A5B70D4F9B66A25E3F7C888D03DD59C8@039-SN2MPN1-023.039d.mgd.msft.net> Sender: kvm-ppc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On 07/23/2012 10:48 AM, Bhushan Bharat-R65777 wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Wood Scott-B07421 >> Sent: Monday, July 23, 2012 9:12 PM >> To: Bhushan Bharat-R65777 >> Cc: kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org; agraf@suse.de; kvm@vger.kernel.org; Bhushan Bharat- >> R65777 >> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] booke: Added ONE_REG interface for IAC/DAC debug >> registers >> >> This will exceed the array size if userspace asks to access IAC3/4 on an e500- >> family chip. > > No , is not the array size already set to maximum. But yes we should not let IAC3/4 being accessed for e500 (FSL_BOOKE). > >> >> Why not just set the array at the max size unconditionally? > > This is already coded this way. Please see the struct is this patch. Sorry, I misread the array declaration. -Scott