On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 06:32:55PM +0800, Fu Wei wrote:
> On 19 January 2017 at 17:11, Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On 2017/1/18 21:25, fu.wei@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >> From: Fu Wei <fu.wei@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> + else if (!gtdt->platform_timer_count)
> >> + pr_debug("No Platform Timer.\n");
> >> + else
> >> + timer_count = gtdt->platform_timer_count;
> >> +
> >> + if (timer_count) {
> >> + platform_timer = (void *)gtdt +
> >> gtdt->platform_timer_offset;
> >> + if (platform_timer < (void *)table +
> >> + sizeof(struct acpi_table_gtdt)) {
> >> + pr_err(FW_BUG "invalid timer data.\n");
> >
> >
> > It's ok but I didn't see other ACPI tables parsing did this check,
> > maybe we can just remove it :)
>
> here, I want to make sure the FW is valid.
> Once there is a FW bug, we could just return with error. :-)
Yes, please keep the check!
If anything, it would be nicer for the other ACPI code to verify things
a little more stringently.
Thanks,
Mark.
--
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
