From: Rasmus Villemoes
Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2016 22:24:09 +0100
> We need to use post-decrement to ensure that irq_dispose_mapping is
> also called on priv->rxq[0]->irq_no; moreover, if one of the above for
> loops failed already at i==0 (so we reach one of these labels with
> that value of i), we'l
From: Francois Romieu
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2016 10:22:54 +0200
> Two years after the initial submission, there is zero change regarding use
> of sxgbe_core_ops for extension or manageability. The extra indirection is
> ripe for removal during next net-next.
I completely agree, that stuff has to go.
On Sun, Mar 27 2016, Francois Romieu wrote:
> Rasmus Villemoes :
>> We need to use post-decrement to ensure that irq_dispose_mapping is
>> also called on priv->rxq[0]->irq_no; moreover, if one of the above for
>> loops failed already at i==0 (so we reach one of these labels with
>> that value of
Rasmus Villemoes :
> We need to use post-decrement to ensure that irq_dispose_mapping is
> also called on priv->rxq[0]->irq_no; moreover, if one of the above for
> loops failed already at i==0 (so we reach one of these labels with
> that value of i), we'll enter an essentially infinite loop of
> o
We need to use post-decrement to ensure that irq_dispose_mapping is
also called on priv->rxq[0]->irq_no; moreover, if one of the above for
loops failed already at i==0 (so we reach one of these labels with
that value of i), we'll enter an essentially infinite loop of
out-of-bounds accesses.
Signed