On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 09:43:29AM -0400, Doug Ledford wrote: > On 6/7/2016 3:16 AM, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 07:53:43PM -0400, Doug Ledford wrote: > >> On 6/4/2016 8:15 AM, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > >>> From: Mark Bloch <markb@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>> > >>> In a attribute group struct, attrs should point to a NULL > >>> terminated list. Which means we need to allocate one more > >>> slot in the array. > >> > >> This patch is both right and wrong. You're right with the intent (that > >> there should be a total of 2 extra entries in the array size, one for > >> the NULL termination and one for the lifespan entry), but wrong with the > >> mechanics (unless I've missed something). We already have two extra > >> entries because sizeof(*hsag) includes our first counter, so just > >> num_counters is actually enough to NULL terminate the list, and + 1 > >> gives us lifespan plus a NULL terminate spot. The comment could be > >> cleaned up to make this more clear though, so I'll do that. > > > > Thanks Doug. > > > > I was wrong with this BTW (I tested to make sure). Even though the > struct includes the name for the array, because it's 0 length, it > reserves 0 space. I thought it would reserve one u64. In any case, I > ended up writing a fix of my own since I had already marked your patch > as not needed in patchworks. I listed Mark as the reporter in that patch. Since I know that you are testing the patches, and your "I'll do that." was enough for me. Thanks. >
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
