On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 09:54:10PM -0600, Simon Glass wrote: > On Mon, 1 Apr 2019 at 14:01, Simon Goldschmidt > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > If the malloc range passed to mem_malloc_init() is at the end of address > > range and 'start + size' overflows to 0, following allocations fail as > > mem_malloc_end is zero (which looks like uninitialized). > > > > Fix this by subtracting 1 of 'start + size' overflows to zero. > > > > Signed-off-by: Simon Goldschmidt <[email protected]> > > --- > > > > Changes in v4: None > > Changes in v3: None > > > > common/dlmalloc.c | 4 ++++ > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) > > Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <[email protected]>
So, the problem with this patch is that it increases the generic malloc code size ever so slightly and blows up smartweb :( -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
