From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933813AbbI1Nhh (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Sep 2015 09:37:37 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:50814 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933762AbbI1Nhg (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Sep 2015 09:37:36 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] ACPI / tables: simplify acpi_parse_entries To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" References: <1442243686-15845-1-git-send-email-sudeep.holla@arm.com> <2184252.JT4i34L2sb@vostro.rjw.lan> <5609123F.7020307@arm.com> <3513292.8DqxMl02v0@vostro.rjw.lan> Cc: Sudeep Holla , "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Al Stone , Lorenzo Pieralisi From: Sudeep Holla Message-ID: <5609429B.6070604@arm.com> Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 14:37:31 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <3513292.8DqxMl02v0@vostro.rjw.lan> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 28/09/15 14:50, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Monday, September 28, 2015 11:11:11 AM Sudeep Holla wrote: >> >> On 26/09/15 01:27, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >>> On Wednesday, September 16, 2015 01:58:06 PM Sudeep Holla wrote: >>>> acpi_parse_entries passes the table end pointer to the sub-table entry >>>> handler. acpi_parse_entries itself could validate the end of an entry >>>> against the table end using the length in the sub-table entry. >>>> >>>> This patch adds the validation of the sub-table entry end using the >>>> length field.This will help to eliminate the need to pass the table end >>>> to the handlers. >>>> >>>> It also moves the check for zero length entry early so that execution of >>>> the handler can be avoided. >>>> >>>> Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" >>>> Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla >>>> >>>> --- >>>> drivers/acpi/tables.c | 31 +++++++++++++++---------------- >>>> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> Hi Rafael, >>>> >>>> As I mentioned earlier, this needs to be applied after Al's MADT changes >>>> are merged. You might get simple conflicts in acpi_parse_entries. >>> >>> This needs to be rebased on top of some patches in my linux-next branch. >>> >>> It probably is better to rebase it on top of my bleeding-edge branch that >>> contains the Al's patches already, though. >>> >> >> I don't see Al's patches in your linux-next or bleeding-edge > > They were there, but I've dropped them due to a 0-day testing failure. > Yes I guess we did see this last week, I had ask Al to fix it privately. It was some discrepancy with ACPIv1.0 specification between different sections that resulted in failures I saw. > I think your patches depend on the Al's ones, is that correct? > Correct, I think it's easier if I wait for his patches. Regards, Sudeep