On Thu, 2008-03-13 at 13:01 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 19:20:09 +0200
> Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> >
> > Since the separation of sense_buffer from scsi_cmnd, Drivers that hack their
> > own struct scsi_cmnd like here isd200, must also take care of their own
> > sense_buffer.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/usb/storage/isd200.c | 5 ++++-
> > 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/usb/storage/isd200.c b/drivers/usb/storage/isd200.c
> > index 4f2d143..971d13d 100644
> > --- a/drivers/usb/storage/isd200.c
> > +++ b/drivers/usb/storage/isd200.c
> > @@ -1470,6 +1470,7 @@ static void isd200_free_info_ptrs(void *info_)
> > if (info) {
> > kfree(info->id);
> > kfree(info->RegsBuf);
> > + kfree(info->srb.sense_buffer);
> > }
> > }
> >
> > @@ -1495,7 +1496,9 @@ static int isd200_init_info(struct us_data *us)
> > kzalloc(sizeof(struct hd_driveid), GFP_KERNEL);
> > info->RegsBuf = (unsigned char *)
> > kmalloc(sizeof(info->ATARegs), GFP_KERNEL);
> > - if (!info->id || !info->RegsBuf) {
> > + info->srb.sense_buffer =
> > + kmalloc(SCSI_SENSE_BUFFERSIZE, GFP_KERNEL);
> > + if (!info->id || !info->RegsBuf || !info->srb.sense_buffer) {
> > isd200_free_info_ptrs(info);
> > kfree(info);
> > retStatus = ISD200_ERROR;
>
> I've thoroughly lost the plot here.
Don't worry ... that's why life gave us SCSI maintainers ...
> Is this needed in 2.6.25? If so, why?
Yes. Because the changes that separate the sense buffer from the
commmand allocation which cause this bug went in in the merge window for
2.6.25
James
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
