On 02/03/2015 12:49 PM, Matt Fleming wrote:
On Wed, 28 Jan, at 05:56:25PM, Ivan Khoronzhuk wrote:
diff --git a/drivers/firmware/dmi-sysfs.c b/drivers/firmware/dmi-sysfs.c
index e0f1cb3..61b6a38 100644
--- a/drivers/firmware/dmi-sysfs.c
+++ b/drivers/firmware/dmi-sysfs.c
@@ -29,6 +29,8 @@
#define MAX_ENTRY_TYPE 255 /* Most of these aren't used, but we consider
the top entry type is only 8 bits */
+static const u8 *smbios_raw_header;
There appears to be a mixture of u8 and unsigned char going on here, cf.
'smbios_header'.
While I'm pretty sure all architectures typedef them to be equivalent,
semantically, as a reviewer this makes me think there are type issues.
Is there any way to use one data type for the SMBIOS header?
Let it be u8 in both cases.
@@ -669,6 +699,18 @@ static int __init dmi_sysfs_init(void)
goto err;
}
+ smbios_raw_header = dmi_get_smbios_entry_area(&size);
+ if (!smbios_raw_header) {
+ pr_debug("dmi-sysfs: SMBIOS raw data is not available.\n");
+ error = -ENODATA;
+ goto err;
Perhaps this should be -EINVAL? -ENODATA implies that if you try again
in the future data might be available, i.e. it's a temporary failure.
That's not the case here since the header is invalid.
Yes, -EINVAL is better.
I'll send new patch soon.
Thanks!
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
