From: Colin King
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2017 12:59:48 +0100
> From: Colin Ian King
>
> iph is being assigned the same value twice; remove the redundant
> first assignment. (Thanks to Nikolay Aleksandrov for pointing out
> that the first asssignment should be removed and not the sec
From: Colin King
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2017 12:13:05 +0100
> From: Colin Ian King
>
> iph is being assigned the same value twice; remove the redundant
> second assignment.
>
> Fixes warning:
> net/ipv4/ip_gre.c:265:2: warning: Value stored to 'iph' is never read
>
On 23/08/17 14:59, Colin King wrote:
> From: Colin Ian King
>
> iph is being assigned the same value twice; remove the redundant
> first assignment. (Thanks to Nikolay Aleksandrov for pointing out
> that the first asssignment should be removed and not the second)
>
> Fixe
From: Colin Ian King
iph is being assigned the same value twice; remove the redundant
first assignment. (Thanks to Nikolay Aleksandrov for pointing out
that the first asssignment should be removed and not the second)
Fixes warning:
net/ipv4/ip_gre.c:265:2: warning: Value stored to 'ip
On 23/08/17 14:13, Colin King wrote:
> From: Colin Ian King
>
> iph is being assigned the same value twice; remove the redundant
> second assignment.
>
> Fixes warning:
> net/ipv4/ip_gre.c:265:2: warning: Value stored to 'iph' is never read
>
> Signed-off-
From: Colin Ian King
iph is being assigned the same value twice; remove the redundant
second assignment.
Fixes warning:
net/ipv4/ip_gre.c:265:2: warning: Value stored to 'iph' is never read
Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King
---
net/ipv4/ip_gre.c | 1 -
1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
di
--- a/net/ipv4/af_inet.c
+++ b/net/ipv4/af_inet.c
@@ -1237,7 +1237,7 @@ struct sk_buff *inet_gso_segment(struct
fixedid = !!(skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_type & SKB_GSO_TCP_FIXEDID);
/* fixed ID is invalid if DF bit is not set */
- if (fixedid &&
3.2.54-rc1 review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
--
From: Jason Wang
commit 6f092343855a71e03b8d209815d8c45bf3a27fcd upstream.
We don't validate iph->ihl which may lead a dead loop if we meet a IPIP
skb whose iph->ihl is zero. Fix this
3.8.13.14 -stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me
know.
--
From: Jason Wang
[ Upstream commit 6f092343855a71e03b8d209815d8c45bf3a27fcd ]
We don't validate iph->ihl which may lead a dead loop if we meet a IPIP
skb whose iph->ihl is zero.
3.5.7.26 -stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me
know.
--
From: Jason Wang
commit 6f092343855a71e03b8d209815d8c45bf3a27fcd upstream.
We don't validate iph->ihl which may lead a dead loop if we meet a IPIP
skb whose iph->ihl is zero.
3.11-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
--
From: Jason Wang
[ Upstream commit 6f092343855a71e03b8d209815d8c45bf3a27fcd ]
We don't validate iph->ihl which may lead a dead loop if we meet a IPIP
skb whose iph->ihl is zero. Fix this
3.4-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
--
From: Jason Wang
[ Upstream commit 6f092343855a71e03b8d209815d8c45bf3a27fcd ]
We don't validate iph->ihl which may lead a dead loop if we meet a IPIP
skb whose iph->ihl is zero. Fix this
3.10-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
--
From: Jason Wang
[ Upstream commit 6f092343855a71e03b8d209815d8c45bf3a27fcd ]
We don't validate iph->ihl which may lead a dead loop if we meet a IPIP
skb whose iph->ihl is zero. Fix this
3.12-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
--
From: Jason Wang
[ Upstream commit 6f092343855a71e03b8d209815d8c45bf3a27fcd ]
We don't validate iph->ihl which may lead a dead loop if we meet a IPIP
skb whose iph->ihl is zero. Fix this
On 11/01/2013 08:01 AM, Jason Wang wrote:
We don't validate iph->ihl which may lead a dead loop if we meet a IPIP
skb whose iph->ihl is zero. Fix this by failing immediately when iph->ihl
is evil (less than 5).
This issue were introduced by commit ec5efe7946280d1e84603389a1030cc
On Fri, Nov 01, 2013 at 03:01:10PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> We don't validate iph->ihl which may lead a dead loop if we meet a IPIP
> skb whose iph->ihl is zero. Fix this by failing immediately when iph->ihl
> is evil (less than 5).
>
> This is
From: Jason Wang
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2013 15:01:10 +0800
> We don't validate iph->ihl which may lead a dead loop if we meet a IPIP
> skb whose iph->ihl is zero. Fix this by failing immediately when iph->ihl
> is evil (less than 5).
>
> This is
On Fri, 2013-11-01 at 15:01 +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> We don't validate iph->ihl which may lead a dead loop if we meet a IPIP
> skb whose iph->ihl is zero. Fix this by failing immediately when iph->ihl
> is evil (less than 5).
>
> This is
On Fri, 2013-11-01 at 15:01 +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> We don't validate iph->ihl which may lead a dead loop if we meet a IPIP
> skb whose iph->ihl is zero. Fix this by failing immediately when iph->ihl
> is evil (less than 5).
>
> This is
We don't validate iph->ihl which may lead a dead loop if we meet a IPIP
skb whose iph->ihl is zero. Fix this by failing immediately when iph->ihl
is evil (less than 5).
This issue were introduced by commit ec5efe7946280d1e84603389a1030ccec0a767ae
(rps: support IPIP encapsulati
2.6.23-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[IPV4] raw: Strengthen check on validity of iph->ihl
[ Upstream commit: f844c74fe07321953e2dd227fe35280075f18f60 ]
We currently check that iph->ih
From: Micah Gruber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2007 13:44:40 +0800
> This trivial patch removes the unneeded pointer iph, which is never used.
>
> Signed-off-by: Micah Gruber < [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Applied, thanks.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line &quo
This trivial patch removes the unneeded pointer iph, which is never used.
Signed-off-by: Micah Gruber < [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
--- a/net/ipv6/ipcomp6.c2007-09-04 23:18:43.0 +0800
+++ b/net/ipv6/ipcomp6.c2007-09-05 00:48:05.0 +0800
@@ -65,7 +65,6 @@
stat
Hi,
I want to know what the field, ihl in the struct iphdr is there
for, I mean its function and the values it takes in different condition.
Specifically, what is the condition when ihl>5.
(See ip_input.c , line 497, depending on if ihl>5, some code is getting
executed.)
I am talking of
24 matches
Mail list logo
