From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx108.postini.com [74.125.245.108]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B9F306B005A for ; Thu, 6 Sep 2012 13:14:47 -0400 (EDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <592e2b8c-d610-49e1-b9b7-71ab6ef680aa@default> Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2012 10:13:58 -0700 (PDT) From: Dan Magenheimer Subject: RE: [patch] staging: ramster: fix range checks in zcache_autocreate_pool() References: <20120906124020.GA28946@elgon.mountain> <20120906162515.GA423@kroah.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Greg Kroah-Hartman , Dan Carpenter Cc: devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, Konrad Wilk > From: Dan Magenheimer > Subject: RE: [patch] staging: ramster: fix range checks in zcache_autocre= ate_pool() >=20 > > From: Greg Kroah-Hartman [mailto:gregkh@linuxfoundation.org] > > Subject: Re: [patch] staging: ramster: fix range checks in zcache_autoc= reate_pool() > > > > On Thu, Sep 06, 2012 at 03:40:20PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > > If "pool_id" is negative then it leads to a read before the start of = the > > > array. If "cli_id" is out of bounds then it leads to a NULL derefere= nce > > > of "cli". GCC would have warned about that bug except that we > > > initialized the warning message away. > > > > > > Also it's better to put the parameter names into the function > > > declaration in the .h file. It serves as a kind of documentation. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter > > > --- > > > BTW, This file has a ton of GCC warnings. This function returns -1 > > > on error which is a nonsense return code but the return value is not > > > checked anyway. *Grumble*. > > > > I agree, it's very messy. Dan Magenheimer should have known better, an= d > > he better be sending me a patch soon to remove these warnings (hint...) >=20 > On its way soon. > > > BTW, This file has a ton of GCC warnings. Submitted (with typo in kernel-janitors address)... but I also just realized from previous feedback on a much earlier thread... I use a stable RHEL6-ish system for devel/test with gcc-4.4.5, and newer gcc's may report more warnings than I see or have fixed. If there is now a required newer gcc version for patch submittals, please let me know. (However, I will be away from email for a few days, so apologies in advance if I can't respond immediately.) -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org