On 03/05/16 15:00, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-28-04 at 06:17:45 UTC, Suraj Jitindar Singh wrote:
>> When unregistering a crash_shutdown_handle in the function
>> crash_shutdown_unregister() the other handles are shifted down in the
>> array to replace the unregistered handle. The for
On Thu, 2016-28-04 at 06:17:45 UTC, Suraj Jitindar Singh wrote:
> When unregistering a crash_shutdown_handle in the function
> crash_shutdown_unregister() the other handles are shifted down in the
> array to replace the unregistered handle. The for loop assumes that the
> last element in the array
>
> Thanks for taking a look Balbir, the size of crash_shutdown_handles is
> actually CRASH_HANDLER_MAX+1.
>
Acked-by: Balbir Singh
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
On Thu, 28 Apr 2016 16:55:13 +1000
Balbir Singh wrote:
> On 28/04/16 16:17, Suraj Jitindar Singh wrote:
> > When unregistering a crash_shutdown_handle in the function
> > crash_shutdown_unregister() the other handles are shifted down in
> > the array to replace the unregistered handle. The for lo
On 28/04/16 16:17, Suraj Jitindar Singh wrote:
> When unregistering a crash_shutdown_handle in the function
> crash_shutdown_unregister() the other handles are shifted down in the
> array to replace the unregistered handle. The for loop assumes that the
> last element in the array is null and use
When unregistering a crash_shutdown_handle in the function
crash_shutdown_unregister() the other handles are shifted down in the
array to replace the unregistered handle. The for loop assumes that the
last element in the array is null and uses this as the stop condition,
however in the case that th
