On Fri, 2011-01-07 at 09:14 -0600, Kumar Gala wrote:
On Jan 3, 2011, at 3:47 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear York Sun,
In message 1294089991.24386.58.camel@oslab-l1 you wrote:
Hm... I have no idea whish sort of "buggy code" you are referring to here, but in this case we shoul start and fix that buggy code, right?
Making a buffer in a function's stack and make use of it out of the scope, that's the buggy code I am referring.
That is bad indeed, and needs to be fixed.
Where is that happening?
You fail to explain why we should change anything when you "don't need more than 128 characters for hwconfig" in the first place?
I don't need more than 128 characters. However, the stack is trashed by other functions. I have to push the stack deeper to keep the content unchanged. I am not happy with it.
Now I understand what you mean.
But we do not need a bigger buffer, or store another copy of the whole content of the "hwconfig" variable - we just need room to for the return value of hwconfig_parse(), which usually should be (much) smaller than the content of the "hwconfig" variable.
I agree with WD, I'm confused. Can you provide the hwconfig string you are using that has issues with 128 but works at 256.
- k
fsl_ddr:ctlr_intlv=cacheline,bank_intlv=cs0_cs1_cs2_cs3,ecc=off,addr_hash=false
With the buffer size 128, the sub function gets "ctlr_intlv=cacheline,bank_intlv=cs0_". It is not because the buffer is not enough, but the stack has been trashed. I have debug log if you need it.
York