From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from nommos.sslcatacombnetworking.com (nommos.sslcatacombnetworking.com [67.18.224.114]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64E1CDDE2A for ; Fri, 16 Mar 2007 01:54:40 +1100 (EST) In-Reply-To: <1173970133624-git-send-email-timur@freescale.com> References: <1173970133624-git-send-email-timur@freescale.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: From: Kumar Gala Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc: fix invalid pointer usage in ucc_slow_init() Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 09:53:44 -0500 To: Timur Tabi Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, paulus@samba.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Mar 15, 2007, at 9:48 AM, Timur Tabi wrote: > In two places, ucc_slow_init() passes a physical address instead of > the > virtual address to functions that were expecting the latter, > causing a kernel > panic. us_info->regs contains the physical address of the UCC > register set. > The registers are ioremap'd to kernel space, and the virtual > pointers are > stored in us_regs. The code was using us_info->regs when it should > have been > using us_regs. > > Signed-off-by: Timur Tabi > --- It's my understanding that there aren't any in kernel users of ucc_slow at the moment, is that true? - k