I couldn't find a good reason for using the sizeof() here, also I
worked on a resize feature. I will send my work after this patch
situation is clarified.
On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 12:57 PM, John Crispin <j...@phrozen.org> wrote:
>
>
> On 10/03/17 11:06, Dan Bugnar wrote:
>>
>> The next message needs to be written after the data of current message.
>> This was adding "sizeof(struct log_head)" bytes between messages.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Dan Bugnar <danut...@gmail.com>
>> ---
>> log/syslog.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/log/syslog.c b/log/syslog.c
>> index ac4f1ae..856fa60 100644
>> --- a/log/syslog.c
>> +++ b/log/syslog.c
>> @@ -51,7 +51,7 @@ static regex_t pat_tstamp;
>> static struct log_head*
>> log_next(struct log_head *h, int size)
>> {
>> - struct log_head *n = (struct log_head *)
>> &h->data[PAD(sizeof(struct log_head) + size)];
>> + struct log_head *n = (struct log_head *) &h->data[PAD(size)];
>> return (n >= log_end) ? (log) : (n);
>> }
>
> I think this was related to the resize feature of the log wrapping code. i
> need to dig into old memories. but i am sure that there was a reason for the
> sizeof()
>
> John
_______________________________________________
Lede-dev mailing list
Lede-dev@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-dev
