On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 11:29 PM, Varadarajan, Charulatha ch...@ti.com wrote:
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 02:56, Hari Kanigeri h-kanige...@ti.com wrote:
In the current mailbox driver, the mailbox internal pointer for
callback can be directly manipulated by the Users, so a second
User can easily
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 18:39, Kanigeri, Hari h-kanige...@ti.com wrote:
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 11:29 PM, Varadarajan, Charulatha ch...@ti.com
wrote:
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 02:56, Hari Kanigeri h-kanige...@ti.com wrote:
In the current mailbox driver, the mailbox internal pointer for
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 7:12 AM, Varadarajan, Charulatha ch...@ti.com wrote:
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 18:39, Kanigeri, Hari h-kanige...@ti.com wrote:
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 11:29 PM, Varadarajan, Charulatha ch...@ti.com
wrote:
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 02:56, Hari Kanigeri h-kanige...@ti.com
In the current mailbox driver, the mailbox internal pointer for
callback can be directly manipulated by the Users, so a second
User can easily corrupt the first user's callback pointer.
The initial effort to correct this issue can be referred here:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/107520/
Along
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 02:56, Hari Kanigeri h-kanige...@ti.com wrote:
In the current mailbox driver, the mailbox internal pointer for
callback can be directly manipulated by the Users, so a second
User can easily corrupt the first user's callback pointer.
The initial effort to correct this
