Does anyone have an idea about this? The code is obviously wrong but
the fix is unclear. Perhaps we should just note the bug in a comment?
regards,
dan carpenter
On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 01:35:20AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> Hello Lv Zheng,
>
> I'm sorry to bother you about this. This code has been this way for
> years, but your recent formatting cleanups made it into something Smatch
> could understand and complain about. Hopefully, you could take a look?
>
> The patch cacba8657351: "ACPICA: Tables: Cleanup RSDP signature
> codes." from Sep 23, 2013, leads to the following
> static checker warning: "drivers/acpi/acpica/tbprint.c:141
> acpi_tb_print_table_header()
> error: strncmp() '((((header->signature))))' too small (4 vs 8)"
>
> drivers/acpi/acpica/tbprint.c
> 138 ACPI_INFO((AE_INFO, "%4.4s %p %05X",
> 139 header->signature, ACPI_CAST_PTR(void, address),
> 140 header->length));
> 141 } else if (ACPI_VALIDATE_RSDP_SIG(header->signature)) {
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> The RSDP_SIG is an 8 character signature but the header->signature
> buffer only has 4 characters so the signatures never match. What's the
> deal with that?
>
> 142
> 143 /* RSDP has no common fields */
> 144
> 145 ACPI_MEMCPY(local_header.oem_id,
> 146 ACPI_CAST_PTR(struct acpi_table_rsdp,
> 147 header)->oem_id, ACPI_OEM_ID_SIZE);
>
> regards,
> dan carpenter
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
