From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from host.buserror.net (host.buserror.net [209.198.135.123]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F24711A0FF8 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:08:55 +1100 (AEDT) Message-ID: <1453831729.27129.35.camel@buserror.net> From: Scott Wood To: Thomas Gleixner , Zhao Qiang Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, leoyang.li@nxp.com, xiaobo.xie@nxp.com Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 12:08:49 -0600 In-Reply-To: References: <1453338364-45129-1-git-send-email-qiang.zhao@nxp.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] qe_ic: fix a buffer overflow error and add check elsewhere List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, 2016-01-26 at 18:31 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Thu, 21 Jan 2016, Zhao Qiang wrote: > > > 127 is the theoretical up boundary of QEIC number, > > in fact there only be 44 qe_ic_info now. > > add check to overflow for qe_ic_info > > How do you trigger that overflow? The above does not explain WHY we need > these > checks. The check in qe_ic_host_map can be triggered by bad data in a device tree. The set_priority functions do not appear to be used at all. > > > diff --git a/drivers/soc/fsl/qe/qe_ic.c b/drivers/soc/fsl/qe/qe_ic.c > > index 5419527..90c00b7 100644 > > --- a/drivers/soc/fsl/qe/qe_ic.c > > +++ b/drivers/soc/fsl/qe/qe_ic.c > > Sigh. Another dump ground for SOC stuff? Another? Where are the others, besides arch? > irq chip drivers belong into drivers/irqchip. Yes. This stuff was recently moved out of arch/powerpc to work toward being able to use it on ARM. I'm expecting followup patches to move things like this that belong elsewhere. -Scott