From: "Arend van Spriel" <arend@broadcom.com>
To: "Dan Carpenter" <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
Cc: "Brett Rudley" <brudley@broadcom.com>,
"Roland Vossen" <rvossen@broadcom.com>,
"Franky (Zhenhui) Lin" <frankyl@broadcom.com>,
"Kan Yan" <kanyan@broadcom.com>,
"John W. Linville" <linville@tuxdriver.com>,
"Hante Meuleman" <meuleman@broadcom.com>,
"Pieter-Paul Giesberts" <pieterpg@broadcom.com>,
linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, brcm80211-dev-list@broadcom.com,
kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 2/3] brcmfmac: fix end of loop check (signedness bug)
Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2012 23:10:09 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <506DFB31.8080208@broadcom.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20121004184212.GO13767@mwanda>
On 10/04/2012 08:42 PM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 06:24:11PM +0200, Arend van Spriel wrote:
>> On 10/03/2012 08:06 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
>>> The problem here is that we loop until "remained_buf_len" is less than
>>> zero, but since it is unsigned, it never is.
>>>
>>> "remained_buf_len" has to be large enough to hold the value from
>>> "mgmt_ie_buf_len". That variable is type u32, but it only holds small
>>> values so I have changed to both variables to int.
>>>
>>> Also I removed the bogus initialization from "mgmt_ie_buf_len" so that
>>> GCC can detect if it is used unitialized. I moved the declaration of
>>> "remained_buf_len" closer to where it is used so it's easier to read.
>>>
>>
>> Hi Dan,
>>
>> Good catch. I applied the patch internally on our HEAD and had it
>> reviewed. We did not take moving the declaration as we prefer to
>> have all variables at the top of the function. It makes it easier to
>> find what is declared in a function and whether exceeding the local
>> variable limit mentioned in Chapter 6. Functions of the CodingStyle
>> (we are exceeding it already ;-) ).
>>
>> Are you ok with us submitting it? It would be sent out for 3.8 or do
>> you prefer to have it fixed in 3.7?
>
> Uh, I don't know how hard it is to trigger this bug. If it's
> impossible to trigger then we could wait until 3.8 otherwise I
> would tend to merge it into 3.7 given that we haven't hit -rc1 yet.
Hi Dan,
I don't know either, but to safe myself the trouble I will post it to
John for 3.7. Thanks.
Gr. AvS
prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-10-04 21:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-10-03 6:06 [patch 2/3] brcmfmac: fix end of loop check (signedness bug) Dan Carpenter
2012-10-04 16:24 ` Arend van Spriel
2012-10-04 18:42 ` Dan Carpenter
2012-10-04 21:10 ` Arend van Spriel [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=506DFB31.8080208@broadcom.com \
--to=arend@broadcom.com \
--cc=brcm80211-dev-list@broadcom.com \
--cc=brudley@broadcom.com \
--cc=dan.carpenter@oracle.com \
--cc=frankyl@broadcom.com \
--cc=kanyan@broadcom.com \
--cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linville@tuxdriver.com \
--cc=meuleman@broadcom.com \
--cc=pieterpg@broadcom.com \
--cc=rvossen@broadcom.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).