From: Michael Buesch <mb@bu3sch.de>
To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <lrodriguez@atheros.com>
Cc: Kalle Valo <kalle.valo@iki.fi>,
linville@tuxdriver.com, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] ath9k_hw: distinguish single-chip solutions on initial probe print
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 17:29:36 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200910261729.38199.mb@bu3sch.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <43e72e890910260921h91c4cb5u5a2fc81e73377055@mail.gmail.com>
On Monday 26 October 2009 17:21:40 Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> >> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/pci.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/pci.c
> >> @@ -114,6 +114,7 @@ static int ath_pci_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev, const struct pci_device_id *id)
> >> u32 val;
> >> int ret = 0;
> >> struct ath_hw *ah;
> >> + char hw_name[1024];
> >
> > Ditto.
>
> We use this for debugfs, so I went with that as an upper limit, given
> that we just use it a probe it seemed sane.
I think it's completely insane, because you effectively use 25% of the available stack.
Why is a hardware name 1024 chars (max) long anyway?
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I would be pissed off after reading the first line already ;)
--
Greetings, Michael.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-10-26 16:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-10-26 14:38 [PATCH 0/4] ath9k_hw: modify hw identification message Luis R. Rodriguez
2009-10-26 14:38 ` [PATCH 1/4] ath9k_hw: move mac name and rf name helpers to hw code Luis R. Rodriguez
2009-10-26 14:38 ` [PATCH 2/4] ath9k_hw: distinguish single-chip solutions on initial probe print Luis R. Rodriguez
2009-10-26 16:14 ` Kalle Valo
2009-10-26 16:21 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2009-10-26 16:29 ` Michael Buesch [this message]
2009-10-26 16:37 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2009-10-26 14:39 ` [PATCH 3/4] ath9k_hw: add AR9271 single chip name mapping Luis R. Rodriguez
2009-10-26 14:39 ` [PATCH 4/4] ath9k_hw: add some debug print for hw initialization Luis R. Rodriguez
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200910261729.38199.mb@bu3sch.de \
--to=mb@bu3sch.de \
--cc=ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org \
--cc=kalle.valo@iki.fi \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linville@tuxdriver.com \
--cc=lrodriguez@atheros.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox