8 Dec
2017
8 Dec
'17
6:43 a.m.
Hi Morimoto-san
On 12/07/2017 01:58 AM, Kuninori Morimoto wrote:
Hi Jiada
Further more, if the passed 'byte' amount to rsnd_ssi_pointer_update() is more than byte_per_period. the calculation of next_period_byte isn't correct.
Is it really happen ??
Basically, I have no objection about this patch, but this explanation is very strange for me...
No, I didn't see the issue, but the implementation of rsnd_ssi_pointer_update(), behaves like it knows all caller will always pass 'byte' no larger than byte_per_period, without any check internally.
I am ok to remove this explanation from commit message, what do you think?
Thanks, Jiada
Best regards
Kuninori Morimoto