René Bolldorf wrote: > On 01/07/10 21:34, René Bolldorf wrote: > > On 01/07/10 20:15, Jeff Garzik wrote: > >> I need a little bit more detail than an unqualified statement... Did > >> you audit all paths leading to this code point? > > > > Yes, and my two systems running fine with the patch, no oops or panic's. > > Sry forgot that: > /* initialize sense_buf with the error register, > * for the case where they are -not- overwritten > */ > sense_buf[0] = 0x70; > sense_buf[2] = dfl_sense_key; > > So i think memset() is not needed and works very well without it. What happens to sense_buf[1]?
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
