Hi Prabhakar, On Wed, 9 Oct 2019 13:08:50 +0000, prabhakar.puj...@dell.com wrote: > Signed-off-by: Prabhakar pujeri <prabhakar.puj...@dell.com>
Please always include a description. > --- > dmidecode.c | 4 +++- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/dmidecode.c b/dmidecode.c > index aef18f8..c87bc8a 100644 > --- a/dmidecode.c > +++ b/dmidecode.c > @@ -1906,7 +1906,9 @@ static const char *dmi_slot_length(u8 code) > "Other", /* 0x01 */ > "Unknown", > "Short", > - "Long" /* 0x04 */ > + "Long", > + "2.5\" drive form factor", > + "3.5\" drive form factor" /* 0x06 */ > }; Good catch, this has been in the specification since version 3.0 and nobody noticed. My bad. However... > if (code >= 0x01 && code <= 0x04) ... you clearly did not test your patch on any affected system, as this test makes your change above a no-op. You need to adjust the upper boundary of the test to match the new array size. Thanks, -- Jean Delvare SUSE L3 Support _______________________________________________ https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/dmidecode-devel
