From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3542DC282CE for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 13:53:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03CAE218D2 for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 13:53:47 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="GlBzAb9o" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730796AbfDXNxp (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Apr 2019 09:53:45 -0400 Received: from mail-oi1-f195.google.com ([209.85.167.195]:39194 "EHLO mail-oi1-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1730096AbfDXNxo (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Apr 2019 09:53:44 -0400 Received: by mail-oi1-f195.google.com with SMTP id n187so14315441oih.6 for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 06:53:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:reply-to:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=/bC6hLD/g3OgUa8hh5mrSXc3gwQP7B0A07LboDv49Wg=; b=GlBzAb9omtamPBJR2+cArV7a4ckFwyF38/OgZ9FtNYRJIg1cV8wF4/355v36l0BKF0 dPUjLaD6AKTtnvbQnO5dluKZz1TqGKdHlqh0Kc2lD3kk1HNTWtWL8TB0sTjEDgKEzWuY pv1fZAkKsdUcpgjlCcF6YgqcG5alK/+kY/LgrWzCfdyMLGRTPlruHeQlWpcwwEhlhWiJ 6WXYknn+BitfeId5sKsmwIkC0eBNwrR/+i8mStn2bOFXv+x+qN22HyH8KoI+8y6DUa9H yf8U9sn8h3O0z7dpLx+0HUe3ZugYkFSloNe6FFTtE12DpzffOE0Hx0r+Ez3Re3XP5Mmv 2xAA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :reply-to:references:mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to :user-agent; bh=/bC6hLD/g3OgUa8hh5mrSXc3gwQP7B0A07LboDv49Wg=; b=GQh4IDBDfVlK7C9nPRlhT2KQ5CGfKkd6qV34M1W2XlTLUUJVPa3nTMhS7wjrYfbG/h oTrQwVugLBAs4a/5QnIqUSJR7Ef8V9gTKUMt6dgqtar8S/CM6eCqxnH5dQBUox4gvkO+ 0dB8lgVchWrMrnJ2+qXUGda0k9a5TdjZ5LtCqNs1KsF4+zxV5OU4UswF8F0eXozYbek1 rjW4Vhw6jrtJcHEWGnE3XB028+4J0CPzLYXUwF9BUMl+Gnt+DAQtuVn6dfkodT1YLkTD h1h08K142uaoBGHmmdzBkvA6LAaZkIc2zXbAogPf1gSNOhZEpzaEcL+FMfDHTfarAhLP k9FQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAW+TMKPrXIgqQU5BPK0gUlVSIu881r29ubMltLGaxL2wc/LgTti Gv5BEMEev0bRV9bwACg+BMl9tk0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqz54UlY38ZpiwFflAQMicz/39nL4plqKYoCaaj5hU2QOi7A6xG58czYcwO+AboFZoAsyqj+Yg== X-Received: by 2002:aca:ef8a:: with SMTP id n132mr1146603oih.98.1556114022977; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 06:53:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from serve.minyard.net ([47.184.134.43]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k60sm7951096otc.42.2019.04.24.06.53.41 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Wed, 24 Apr 2019 06:53:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from minyard.net (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:b8f6:1b:d5e:aa5a:44d8:6907]) by serve.minyard.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5D0501800CF; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 13:53:41 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2019 08:53:40 -0500 From: Corey Minyard To: Kamlakant Patel Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Jayachandran Chandrasekharan Nair , "openipmi-developer@lists.sourceforge.net" Subject: Re: [PATCH] ipmi:ssif: compare block number correctly for multi-part return messages Message-ID: <20190424135340.GD6623@minyard.net> Reply-To: minyard@acm.org References: <1556106615-18722-1-git-send-email-kamlakantp@marvell.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1556106615-18722-1-git-send-email-kamlakantp@marvell.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 11:50:43AM +0000, Kamlakant Patel wrote: > According to ipmi spec, block number is a number that is incremented, > starting with 0, for each new block of message data returned using the > Middle transaction. > > Here, the 'blocknum' is data[0] which always starts from zero(0) and > 'ssif_info->multi_pos' starts from 1. > So, we need to add +1 to blocknum while comparing with multi_pos. Indeed, I think you are right. I hope there's no other hardware that mis-interprets this like I did. I'll need to fix my qemu simulation, too. The funny thing is, the comment is correct. Hmm. I'll hand-apply this, as it has DOS newlines, too. -corey > > This change fixes ("ipmi:ssif: Fix handling of multi-part return > messages"). > > Reported-by: Kiran Kolukuluru > Signed-off-by: Kamlakant Patel > --- > drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_ssif.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_ssif.c b/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_ssif.c > index 8b5aec5..2b03845 100644 > --- a/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_ssif.c > +++ b/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_ssif.c > @@ -727,7 +727,7 @@ static void msg_done_handler(struct ssif_info *ssif_info, int result, > /* End of read */ > len = ssif_info->multi_len; > data = ssif_info->data; > - } else if (blocknum != ssif_info->multi_pos) { > + } else if (blocknum + 1 != ssif_info->multi_pos) { > /* > * Out of sequence block, just abort. Block > * numbers start at zero for the second block, > -- > 1.8.3.1 >