On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 05:41:08PM +0200, walter harms wrote: > > > Am 18.07.2013 01:36, schrieb Guenter Roeck: > > On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 03:26:14PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > >> We cleaned up this code to use ARRAY_SIZE() instead of just the number > >> 4. The problem is that data->reg_temp[] has 5 elements and we actually > >> wanted ARRAY_SIZE(data->temp) which has 4 elements. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> > > Hi Dan, > > > > good catch, except that the array size of data->temp[] should be 5, not 4. > > So the real culprit is commit 7cbbd6a (Add support for critical low/high > > temperature limits on NCT6106) which increased the size of reg_temp but not the > > size of temp. > > > > Do you want to send me a patch fixing that, or should I take care of it ? > > > > Thanks, > > Guenter > > hi Guenther, > is an array the way to go here ? To avoid that kind of problems they sould be > connected some how. Is it possible to replace the array with a malloc() ? > To clean it up I should probably add a define for the array sizes. A malloc would be overkill. Guenter -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
