On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 8:43 AM Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 7:19 AM Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: [..] > > > + > > > + if (cmd == ND_CMD_CALL) { > > > + int i; > > > + > > > + if (call_pkg && nfit_mem->family != call_pkg->nd_family) > > > + return -ENOTTY; > > > + > > > + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(call_pkg->nd_reserved2); i++) > > > + if (call_pkg->nd_reserved2[i]) > > > + return -EINVAL; > > > + return call_pkg->nd_command; > > > + } > > > + > > > + /* Linux ND commands == NVDIMM_FAMILY_INTEL function numbers */ > > > + if (nfit_mem->family == NVDIMM_FAMILY_INTEL) > > > + return cmd; > > > + return 0; > > > > Function zero? Is that really the right thing to return here? > > Yes, function zero is never set in n ...whoops fumble fingered "send" Function zero should never be set in nfit_mem->dsm_mask, although the NVDIMM_FAMILY_MSFT mask violates this assumption. I'll fix that up.