On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 04:51:03AM -0700, Michael Zoran wrote:
> The original version seems to have been applied at this point. The
> whole function looks like it could use some cleanup in general. Should
> I just submit those an independent patch when I get to it or should I
> submit a V2 the
On Tue, 2017-03-21 at 14:45 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 04:36:16AM -0700, Michael Zoran wrote:
> > On Tue, 2017-03-21 at 13:41 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > > You're fixing a bug you introduced in [PATCH 1/5]. Don't do
> > > that. Just
> > > fix Dave's patch and add a
On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 04:36:16AM -0700, Michael Zoran wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-03-21 at 13:41 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > You're fixing a bug you introduced in [PATCH 1/5]. Don't do
> > that. Just
> > fix Dave's patch and add a note in the commit log.
> >
> > regards,
> > dan carpenter
> >
On Tue, 2017-03-21 at 13:41 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> You're fixing a bug you introduced in [PATCH 1/5]. Don't do
> that. Just
> fix Dave's patch and add a note in the commit log.
>
> regards,
> dan carpenter
>
OK, thanks I'm still learning about the whole process. It looks like
Dave's
You're fixing a bug you introduced in [PATCH 1/5]. Don't do that. Just
fix Dave's patch and add a note in the commit log.
regards,
dan carpenter
___
devel mailing list
de...@linuxdriverproject.org
On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 02:56:43PM -0700, Michael Zoran wrote:
> Fix port_paremeter_get function blindly subtracts 8 from a reply
> size without checking that the size is at lest 8 bytes. This can
> casue a large buffer to be copied since the size is unsigned.
>
> Add a WARN_ON, and also add min
Fix port_paremeter_get function blindly subtracts 8 from a reply
size without checking that the size is at lest 8 bytes. This can
casue a large buffer to be copied since the size is unsigned.
Add a WARN_ON, and also add min and max conditions to the size
of the data that is copied.
