This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled

    nfsd: wrong index used in inner loop

to the 2.6.32-longterm tree which can be found at:
    
http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/longterm/longterm-queue-2.6.32.git;a=summary

The filename of the patch is:
     nfsd-wrong-index-used-in-inner-loop.patch
and it can be found in the queue-2.6.32 subdirectory.

If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the 2.6.32 longterm 
tree,
please let <[email protected]> know about it.


>From 3ec07aa9522e3d5e9d5ede7bef946756e623a0a0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: roel <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 22:32:26 +0100
Subject: nfsd: wrong index used in inner loop

From: roel <[email protected]>

commit 3ec07aa9522e3d5e9d5ede7bef946756e623a0a0 upstream.

Index i was already used in the outer loop

Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: J. Bruce Fields <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>

---
 fs/nfsd/nfs4xdr.c |    4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

--- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4xdr.c
+++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4xdr.c
@@ -1114,7 +1114,7 @@ nfsd4_decode_create_session(struct nfsd4
 
        u32 dummy;
        char *machine_name;
-       int i;
+       int i, j;
        int nr_secflavs;
 
        READ_BUF(16);
@@ -1187,7 +1187,7 @@ nfsd4_decode_create_session(struct nfsd4
                        READ_BUF(4);
                        READ32(dummy);
                        READ_BUF(dummy * 4);
-                       for (i = 0; i < dummy; ++i)
+                       for (j = 0; j < dummy; ++j)
                                READ32(dummy);
                        break;
                case RPC_AUTH_GSS:


Patches currently in longterm-queue-2.6.32 which might be from 
[email protected] are

/home/gregkh/linux/longterm/longterm-queue-2.6.32/queue-2.6.32/nfsd-wrong-index-used-in-inner-loop.patch

_______________________________________________
stable mailing list
[email protected]
http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/stable

Reply via email to