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 S1753670AbcEDPq5 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 4 May 2016 11:46:57 -0400
Received: from mail-pf0-f196.google.com ([209.85.192.196]:35982 "EHLO
	mail-pf0-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751636AbcEDPqz (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 4 May 2016 11:46:55 -0400
Date: Wed, 4 May 2016 23:43:47 +0800
From: Wang YanQing <udknight@gmail.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org,
        David Herrmann <dh.herrmann@gmail.com>,
        Peter Jones <pjones@redhat.com>, stable@vger.kernel.org,
        Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@ti.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] x86/sysfb_efi: Fix valid BAR address range check
Message-ID: <20160504154344.GA3146@udknight>
Mail-Followup-To: Wang YanQing <udknight@gmail.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org,
	David Herrmann <dh.herrmann@gmail.com>,
	Peter Jones <pjones@redhat.com>, stable@vger.kernel.org,
	Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@ti.com>
References: <1462303781-8686-1-git-send-email-matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>
 <1462303781-8686-3-git-send-email-matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>
 <20160504063524.GB12846@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20160504063524.GB12846@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.22 (2013-10-16)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, May 04, 2016 at 08:35:24AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> > From: Wang YanQing <udknight@gmail.com>
> > 
> > We can't just break out when meet start is equal to zero,
> 
> Hm, wot?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 	Ingo

Sorry for my poor English ,and poor commit message, this bring
trouble for more than one maintainer, I guess.

The old code use below comparion as condition to terminate valid 
range check without care whether there are more ranges in later
BARs:
"
        if (start == 0)
            break;
"

I guess original author think (or make a mistake) when we meet a 
address range begin from zero means it is a invalid address range, 
and no valid address ranges in remain BARs.

So I said:
We can't break the loop when meet range whose start address is zero,
without check it and remaining BARs' range.

Thanks.