From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1755407AbbICNKI (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 3 Sep 2015 09:10:08 -0400
Received: from relay1.sgi.com ([192.48.180.66]:40204 "EHLO relay.sgi.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1752004AbbICNKG (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 3 Sep 2015 09:10:06 -0400
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2015 08:09:56 -0500
From: Dimitri Sivanich <sivanich@sgi.com>
To: Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] drivers/misc/sgi-gru: remove unused variable
Message-ID: <20150903130956.GA17380@sgi.com>
References: <1441193098-13885-1-git-send-email-sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com>
 <20150902144204.GA26958@sgi.com>
 <20150903044012.GA3965@sudip-pc>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20150903044012.GA3965@sudip-pc>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, Sep 03, 2015 at 10:10:12AM +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 02, 2015 at 09:42:04AM -0500, Dimitri Sivanich wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 02, 2015 at 04:54:55PM +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> > > These variables were only assigned some value and were never used.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Sudip Mukherjee <sudip@vectorindia.org>
> > > ---
> > > 
> <snip>
> > > +	int i;
> > +
> > + 	if ((GRU_NUM_TFM * GRU_CACHE_LINE_BYTES) > (ubufend - ubuf))
> > +		return -EFBIG;
> Just a minor (or major) doubt.
> The function returns GRU_NUM_TFM * GRU_CACHE_LINE_BYTES and the for loop
> is also running till GRU_NUM_TFM so I am assuming that the function can
> handle buffer till size of GRU_NUM_TFM * GRU_CACHE_LINE_BYTES. So the
> error -EFBIG should occur when the buffer is more than this. Then
> shouldn't it be:
> if ((GRU_NUM_TFM * GRU_CACHE_LINE_BYTES) < (ubufend - ubuf))
> 	return -EFBIG;
> 
> or i am wrong in interpreting it?
>
The likely intent was to return an error when the buffer isn't big enough
to hold GRU_NUM_TFM * GRU_CACHE_LINE_BYTES.