On Thu, Feb 05, 2009 at 11:47:36AM +0900, Hidetoshi Seto wrote:
> The commit bffac3c593eba1f9da3efd0199e49ea6558a40ce does:
>
> - temp = (1 << multi_msi_capable(control));
> - temp = ((temp - 1) & ~temp);
> + temp = msi_mask((control & PCI_MSI_FLAGS_QMASK) >> 1);
>
> and provides msi_mask() to avoid undefined shift by 32.
[...]
> This patch fix the wrong array in the msi_mask().
Quite correct. While disconnected for a couple of weeks, I also
considered this possible fix:
static inline __attribute_const__ u32 msi_mask(unsigned x)
{
/* Don't shift by >= width of type */
if (x >= 5)
return 0xffffffff;
return (1 << (1 << x)) - 1;
}
which has the added bonus of not running off the end of the array if
some device has a bogus value in its config space.
What do you think?
--
Matthew Wilcox Intel Open Source Technology Centre
"Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this
operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such
a retrograde step."
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
