Testing now, will re-submit in the correct format once I confirm it works as intended. On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 1:20 PM, Andrew Lunn <andrew@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> diff -ruN a/drivers/staging/rtl8712/rtl871x_sta_mgt.c >> >> b/drivers/staging/rtl8712/rtl871x_sta_mgt.c >> >> --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8712/rtl871x_sta_mgt.c 2012-11-05 >> >> 03:57:06.000000000 -0500 >> >> +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8712/rtl871x_sta_mgt.c 2012-11-13 >> >> 12:54:28.000000000 -0500 >> >> @@ -55,8 +55,8 @@ >> >> NUM_STA + 4); >> >> if (pstapriv->pallocated_stainfo_buf == NULL) >> >> return _FAIL; >> >> - pstapriv->pstainfo_buf = pstapriv->pallocated_stainfo_buf + 4 - >> >> - ((addr_t)(pstapriv->pallocated_stainfo_buf) & 3); >> >> + pstapriv->pstainfo_buf = pstapriv->pallocated_stainfo_buf + 8 - >> >> + ((addr_t)(pstapriv->pallocated_stainfo_buf) & 7); >> > >> > Are you sure this is safe? Is the allocated buffer large enough for >> > those additional 4 bytes of alignment you're adding? >> >> I'm not certain on that, I bumped the allocations at Andrew's >> suggestion, but don't know enough to certify the changes as 100% >> correct. > > Its not correct. > > The original code is: > > pstapriv->pallocated_stainfo_buf = _malloc(sizeof(struct sta_info) * > NUM_STA + 4); > if (pstapriv->pallocated_stainfo_buf == NULL) > return _FAIL; > pstapriv->pstainfo_buf = pstapriv->pallocated_stainfo_buf + 4 - > ((addr_t)(pstapriv->pallocated_stainfo_buf) & 3); > > The 4 in the _malloc() also needs increasing to 8. > > Andrew _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
