On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 1:19 PM, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 5:54 PM, Craig Gallek wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 10:00 AM, Andrey Konovalov
>> wrote:
>>> When calculating rb->frames_per_block * req->tp_block_nr the result
>>> can overflow.
>>>
>>> Add a check that tp_bl
On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 5:54 PM, Craig Gallek wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 10:00 AM, Andrey Konovalov
> wrote:
>> When calculating rb->frames_per_block * req->tp_block_nr the result
>> can overflow.
>>
>> Add a check that tp_block_size * tp_block_nr <= UINT_MAX.
>>
>> Since frames_per_block <
On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 10:00 AM, Andrey Konovalov
wrote:
> When calculating rb->frames_per_block * req->tp_block_nr the result
> can overflow.
>
> Add a check that tp_block_size * tp_block_nr <= UINT_MAX.
>
> Since frames_per_block <= tp_block_size, the expression would
> never overflow.
>
> Sign
When calculating rb->frames_per_block * req->tp_block_nr the result
can overflow.
Add a check that tp_block_size * tp_block_nr <= UINT_MAX.
Since frames_per_block <= tp_block_size, the expression would
never overflow.
Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov
---
net/packet/af_packet.c | 3 +++
1 file c