On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 01:52:43PM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote:
> Sorry for the late answer, I'm back from vacation.
>
> On the principle, the change looks sane to me. However I suspect
> there's an off-by-one bug:
>
> > +{
> > + return address >= priv->smba &&
> > + address < pci_resource_end(priv->pci_dev, SMBBAR);
> > +}
>
> Shouldn't the second test use "<=" instead of "<"?
You are right. I'll fix that and send v2.
> Other than that, looks good to me, so you can add my:
>
> Reviewed-by: Jean Delvare <jdelvare@xxxxxxx>
Thanks!
