Hi,
On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 03:13:24PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> Ah sorry. That was a stupid mistake. But it might be bad to
> access header->len now because that's still some device memory
> and not the copy of the memory into ram anymore. How about
> this patch instead? Commit text and authorship can be the same as
> the original patch.
>
> ---8<----
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/broadcom/bcm47xx_nvram.c b/drivers/firmware/broadcom/bcm47xx_nvram.c
> index 0c2f0a61b0ea..0b631e5b5b84 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/broadcom/bcm47xx_nvram.c
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/broadcom/bcm47xx_nvram.c
> @@ -94,15 +94,14 @@ static int nvram_find_and_copy(void __iomem *iobase, u32 lim)
>
> found:
> __ioread32_copy(nvram_buf, header, sizeof(*header) / 4);
> - header = (struct nvram_header *)nvram_buf;
> - nvram_len = header->len;
> + nvram_len = ((struct nvram_header *)(nvram_buf))->len;
> if (nvram_len > size) {
> pr_err("The nvram size according to the header seems to be bigger than the partition on flash\n");
> nvram_len = size;
> }
> if (nvram_len >= NVRAM_SPACE) {
> pr_err("nvram on flash (%i bytes) is bigger than the reserved space in memory, will just copy the first %i bytes\n",
> - header->len, NVRAM_SPACE - 1);
> + nvram_len, NVRAM_SPACE - 1);
I'm OK with this as well; I'll test this on my router (just to be sure :))
and send a v2.
Thanks,
A.
