Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753893Ab2BRVEL (ORCPT ); Sat, 18 Feb 2012 16:04:11 -0500 Received: from mail-pw0-f46.google.com ([209.85.160.46]:48050 "EHLO mail-pw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753716Ab2BRVEE (ORCPT ); Sat, 18 Feb 2012 16:04:04 -0500 Authentication-Results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of hughd@google.com designates 10.68.73.6 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=hughd@google.com; dkim=pass header.i=hughd@google.com Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2012 13:03:34 -0800 (PST) From: Hugh Dickins X-X-Sender: hugh@eggly.anvils To: Holger Macht cc: Hillf Danton , Matthew Garrett , Jeff Garzik , Stephen Rothwell , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton Subject: Re: linux-next: dock_link_device is oopsy In-Reply-To: <20120218195722.GA2590@homac.suse.de> Message-ID: References: <20120217222922.GA2741@homac.suse.de> <20120217230107.GA12929@homac.suse.de> <20120218111419.GA2488@homac.suse.de> <20120218132610.GA15265@homac.suse.de> <20120218140449.GA2558@homac.suse.de> <20120218195722.GA2590@homac.suse.de> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LSU 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1536 Lines: 33 On Sat, 18 Feb 2012, Holger Macht wrote: > On Sa 18. Feb - 10:46:04, Hugh Dickins wrote: > > On Sat, 18 Feb 2012, Holger Macht wrote: > > > How about that one? > > > > It's more broken than that. Here's my attempt. It boots on the > > systems with dock_station_count 0, and it boots on my laptop with > > dock_station_count 2; but I don't actually have any docking station, > > so it still doesn't test very much (dock is 0 after the loop). > > Well, there doesn't have to actually exist a physical dock station (or > bay device) for dock_station_count to be > 0. It just tells that the > ACPI objects are present and thus the system is capable of it. > > So does this function actually also break on your laptop and you're > getting the oops there, too? It oopsed on the 4-year-old Fujitsu-Siemens laptop whose dock_station_count was 0. It did not oops on the new ThinkPad laptop whose dock_station_count is 2, but no docks were found: so the function would only have been leaking memory on that. If docks were found, then I suspect it could have been scribbling, but I cannot actually check if that's true (for all I know, dock_station_count may be always 1 bigger than the most that that double loop can discover); but at least the loop is now made safe against scribbling. Hugh -- 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/