From: Dan Carpenter <hidden> Date: 2011-03-19 04:39:34
The calculation is off-by-one. It should be "end - start + 1". This
patch fixes it to use resource_size() instead. Oddly, the code already
uses resource size correctly a couple lines earlier when it calls
request_mem_region() for this memory.
Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <redacted>
From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> Date: 2011-03-19 04:52:35
From: Dan Carpenter <redacted>
Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2011 07:39:15 +0300
The calculation is off-by-one. It should be "end - start + 1". This
patch fixes it to use resource_size() instead. Oddly, the code already
uses resource size correctly a couple lines earlier when it calls
request_mem_region() for this memory.
Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <redacted>
Hi Dan,
On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Dan Carpenter [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted hunk
The calculation is off-by-one. It should be "end - start + 1". This
patch fixes it to use resource_size() instead. Oddly, the code already
uses resource size correctly a couple lines earlier when it calls
request_mem_region() for this memory.
Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <redacted>