Re: [PATCH] gianfar: Fix possible overrun and simplify interrupt namefield creation

[Paul Gortmaker]

On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 11:34 PM, David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 22:34:57 -0400 (EDT)
>
>> From: Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2012 12:05:38 -0700
>>
>>> Space allocated for int_name_<foo> is unsufficient for
>>> maximal device name, expand it.
>>>
>>> Code to create int_name_<foo> is obscure, simplify it
>>> by using sprintf.
>>>
>>> Found by looking for unnecessary \ line continuations.
>>> Uncompiled, untested.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> Can a gianfar expert please review and test this patch?
>
> If you gianfar guys don't show a sign of life in the next 24 hours I'm
> just going to apply Joe's patch as-is.  I refuse to just let it rot in
> patchwork like this.
>
> And then you don't get to complain if his change breaks your driver
> because I asked multiple times for testing and/or review.

I don't claim to be a giant fart expert, but the sbc8641D has 4 of
the gianfar ports, and so I can use that hardware to look into
testing this on a real board and check that a cat /proc/interrupts
doesn't do something evil this weekend.  The patch looks sane in
that it culls lines of open coded junk...  FWIW.

Paul.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/