Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 10 Aug 2007 17:21:51 +0400 | From | Pavel Emelyanov <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Fix OOPS in show_uevent() |
| |
Cornelia Huck wrote: > On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 14:23:56 +0200, > "Kay Sievers" <kay.sievers@vrfy.org> wrote: > >> But we still don't update the remaining buffer size and the remaining >> array fields which are left after the call. Shouldn't we instead just >> change the: >> int (*dev_uevent)(struct device *dev, >> char **envp, int num_envp, >> char *buffer, int buffer_size); >> to: >> int (*dev_uevent)(struct device *dev, >> char **envp, int num_envp, int *cur_index, >> char *buffer, int buffer_size, int *cur_len); >> >> like we do for: >> int add_uevent_var(char **envp, int num_envp, int *cur_index, >> char *buffer, int buffer_size, int *cur_len, >> const char *format, ...) >> >> and along with the change of the callers, we would update the values >> properly, so the next call has the correct numbers? There are 6 >> classes and something like 12 buses using this method, so it shouldn't >> be too much trouble.
isn't it better to change int (*dev_uevent)(struct device *dev, char **envp, int num_envp, char *buffer, int buffer_size); to int (*dev_uevent)(struct device *dev, char **envp, int num_envp, char **buffer); and alter the buffer pointer inside?
> Sounds like a sensible approach. We may want the remaining non-users to > add_uevent_var() at the same time, I guess. >
Thanks, Pavel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |