On Sun, Dec 09, 2012 at 01:31:50AM +0100, Cyril Roelandt wrote:
> On 12/05/2012 08:11 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> >On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 02:22:02AM +0100, Cyril Roelandt wrote:
> >>In r8711_wx_get_wap(), make sure we do not call memcpy() on a memory area
> >>that
> >>has just been zeroed by a
On Sun, Dec 09, 2012 at 01:31:50AM +0100, Cyril Roelandt wrote:
On 12/05/2012 08:11 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 02:22:02AM +0100, Cyril Roelandt wrote:
In r8711_wx_get_wap(), make sure we do not call memcpy() on a memory area
that
has just been zeroed by a call to
On 12/05/2012 08:11 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 02:22:02AM +0100, Cyril Roelandt wrote:
In r8711_wx_get_wap(), make sure we do not call memcpy() on a memory area that
has just been zeroed by a call to memset().
I look at it like the original code is fine. Your version
On 12/05/2012 08:11 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 02:22:02AM +0100, Cyril Roelandt wrote:
In r8711_wx_get_wap(), make sure we do not call memcpy() on a memory area that
has just been zeroed by a call to memset().
I look at it like the original code is fine. Your version
Hi Cyril,
you patch is correct ..but being an advocate of defensive programming
i would say the original version especially since the number of bytes is small.
re,
wh
Am 05.12.2012 02:22, schrieb Cyril Roelandt:
> In r8711_wx_get_wap(), make sure we do not call memcpy() on a memory area that
>
Hi Cyril,
you patch is correct ..but being an advocate of defensive programming
i would say the original version especially since the number of bytes is small.
re,
wh
Am 05.12.2012 02:22, schrieb Cyril Roelandt:
In r8711_wx_get_wap(), make sure we do not call memcpy() on a memory area that
On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 02:22:02AM +0100, Cyril Roelandt wrote:
> In r8711_wx_get_wap(), make sure we do not call memcpy() on a memory area that
> has just been zeroed by a call to memset().
>
I look at it like the original code is fine. Your version is also
fine but is it worth the churn?
On 12/04/2012 07:22 PM, Cyril Roelandt wrote:
In r8711_wx_get_wap(), make sure we do not call memcpy() on a memory area that
has just been zeroed by a call to memset().
Signed-off-by: Cyril Roelandt
---
drivers/staging/rtl8712/rtl871x_ioctl_linux.c |3 ++-
1 file changed, 2
In r8711_wx_get_wap(), make sure we do not call memcpy() on a memory area that
has just been zeroed by a call to memset().
Signed-off-by: Cyril Roelandt
---
drivers/staging/rtl8712/rtl871x_ioctl_linux.c |3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git
In r8711_wx_get_wap(), make sure we do not call memcpy() on a memory area that
has just been zeroed by a call to memset().
Signed-off-by: Cyril Roelandt tipec...@gmail.com
---
drivers/staging/rtl8712/rtl871x_ioctl_linux.c |3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git
On 12/04/2012 07:22 PM, Cyril Roelandt wrote:
In r8711_wx_get_wap(), make sure we do not call memcpy() on a memory area that
has just been zeroed by a call to memset().
Signed-off-by: Cyril Roelandt tipec...@gmail.com
---
drivers/staging/rtl8712/rtl871x_ioctl_linux.c |3 ++-
1 file
On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 02:22:02AM +0100, Cyril Roelandt wrote:
In r8711_wx_get_wap(), make sure we do not call memcpy() on a memory area that
has just been zeroed by a call to memset().
I look at it like the original code is fine. Your version is also
fine but is it worth the churn? Also
12 matches
Mail list logo