Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/1] slirp: don't zero ti_i since we acccess it later.

Hello, lepton, on lun. 08 mai 2017 12:08:55 -0700, wrote: > 1.  For some reason, caller didn't setup anything in tcpiphdr, so there is > random data inside it. > 2.  For some reason, caller setup correct src/dst address in tcpiphdr but > don't > zero ix_h1 > If you still think this doesn't look

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/1] slirp: don't zero ti_i since we acccess it later.

Hi Samuel, There could 2 kind of bugs: 1. For some reason, caller didn't setup anything in tcpiphdr, so there is random data inside it. 2. For some reason, caller setup correct src/dst address in tcpiphdr but don't zero ix_h1 Actually I worried about bug 1 more than bug 2. With assert in

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/1] slirp: don't zero ti_i since we acccess it later.

Hello, lepton, on mer. 03 mai 2017 11:35:05 -0700, wrote: > It sounds like a bug that  caller set up a > right src and dst address and without set right ih_x1. I wouldn't bet on that. ih_x1 is only a filler, the caller can be using the structure only as a C structure, and it's only here just

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/1] slirp: don't zero ti_i since we acccess it later.

Hi Samuel, Should I add an assert for ih_x1? It sounds like a bug that caller set up a right src and dst address and without set right ih_x1. On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 6:21 AM, Samuel Thibault wrote: > Hello, > > Thomas Huth, on lun. 24 avril 2017 11:15:56 +0200,

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/1] slirp: don't zero ti_i since we acccess it later.

Hello, Thomas Huth, on lun. 24 avril 2017 11:15:56 +0200, wrote: > On 20.04.2017 22:43, Tao Wu wrote: > > The current code looks buggy, we zero ti_i while we access > > ti_dst/ti_src later. Indeed. > > Signed-off-by: Tao Wu > > *mtod(m, struct tcpiphdr *) = *ti;

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/1] slirp: don't zero ti_i since we acccess it later.

On 20.04.2017 22:43, Tao Wu wrote: > The current code looks buggy, we zero ti_i while we access > ti_dst/ti_src later. > > Signed-off-by: Tao Wu > --- > slirp/tcp_subr.c | 1 - > 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/slirp/tcp_subr.c b/slirp/tcp_subr.c > index

[Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/1] slirp: don't zero ti_i since we acccess it later.

The current code looks buggy, we zero ti_i while we access ti_dst/ti_src later. Signed-off-by: Tao Wu --- slirp/tcp_subr.c | 1 - 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/slirp/tcp_subr.c b/slirp/tcp_subr.c index dc8b4bbb50..398d6b30d3 100644 --- a/slirp/tcp_subr.c +++