On 25 September 2017 at 23:53, Alistair Francis wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 3:38 PM, Peter Maydell
> wrote:
>> On 25 September 2017 at 22:16, Alistair Francis wrote:
>>> On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 12:27 PM, Peter Maydell
>>> wrote:
Alistair, were you planning to provide a reviewed-by: f
On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 3:38 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 25 September 2017 at 22:16, Alistair Francis wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 12:27 PM, Peter Maydell
>> wrote:
>>> Alistair, were you planning to provide a reviewed-by: for this
>>> patch (or did you have more review comments on it)?
>
On 25 September 2017 at 22:16, Alistair Francis wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 12:27 PM, Peter Maydell
> wrote:
>> Alistair, were you planning to provide a reviewed-by: for this
>> patch (or did you have more review comments on it)?
>
> Ah woops, this slipped through. Looks fine to me then.
>
>
On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 12:27 PM, Peter Maydell
wrote:
> On 20 September 2017 at 07:19, Michael Olbrich
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 05:09:51PM -0700, Alistair Francis wrote:
>>> On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 1:23 AM, Michael Olbrich
>>> wrote:
>>> > On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 02:28:26PM -0700, A
On 20 September 2017 at 07:19, Michael Olbrich wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 05:09:51PM -0700, Alistair Francis wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 1:23 AM, Michael Olbrich
>> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 02:28:26PM -0700, Alistair Francis wrote:
>> >> On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 3:35 AM, Mic
On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 05:09:51PM -0700, Alistair Francis wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 1:23 AM, Michael Olbrich
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 02:28:26PM -0700, Alistair Francis wrote:
> >> On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 3:35 AM, Michael Olbrich
> >> wrote:
> >> > hw/sd/sd.c | 12 ++-
On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 1:23 AM, Michael Olbrich
wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 02:28:26PM -0700, Alistair Francis wrote:
>> On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 3:35 AM, Michael Olbrich
>> wrote:
>> > The current code checks if the next block exceeds the size of the card.
>> > This generates an error while
On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 02:28:26PM -0700, Alistair Francis wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 3:35 AM, Michael Olbrich
> wrote:
> > The current code checks if the next block exceeds the size of the card.
> > This generates an error while reading the last block of the card.
> > Do the out-of-bounds c
On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 3:35 AM, Michael Olbrich
wrote:
> The current code checks if the next block exceeds the size of the card.
> This generates an error while reading the last block of the card.
> Do the out-of-bounds check when starting to read a new block to fix this.
>
> This issue became vi
The current code checks if the next block exceeds the size of the card.
This generates an error while reading the last block of the card.
Do the out-of-bounds check when starting to read a new block to fix this.
This issue became visible with increased error checking in Linux 4.13.
Signed-off-by:
10 matches
Mail list logo