> On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 5:04 PM, Sinan Kaya <okaya@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 11/12/2015 4:56 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>> On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 8:14 AM, Sinan Kaya <okaya@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> wrote:
>>>> - if (acpi_irq_balance || !link->irq.active) {
>>>> + if ((acpi_irq_balance || !link->irq.active) && (irq <
>>>> ACPI_MAX_IRQS)) {
>>>> /*
>>>
>>>> - * Select the best IRQ. This is done in reverse to
>>>> promote
>>>> - * the use of IRQs 9, 10, 11, and >15.
>>>> + * Select the best IRQ. This is done in reverse to
>>>> + * promote the use of IRQs 9, 10, 11, and >15.
>>>
>>> What was changed here?
>>
>> See your comments here.
>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/11/8/231
>
> So, you refer to narrow commentary blocks, right?
> It was about *new* code, leave as is what was before your patch series.
>
> --
> With Best Regards,
> Andy Shevchenko
>
This is what it was before.
> if (acpi_irq_balance || !link->irq.active) {
> - /*
> - * Select the best IRQ. This is done in reverse to promote
> - * the use of IRQs 9, 10, 11, and >15.
> - */
> - for (i = (link->irq.possible_count - 1); i >= 0; i--) {
> - if (acpi_irq_penalty[irq] >
> - acpi_irq_penalty[link->irq.possible[i]])
> - irq = link->irq.possible[i];
I added a range check for link->irq.possible[i] and irq into this code.
--
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
