64 bit value / 4 = 62 bit value, right?
Jarod Wilson wrote:
>On Thu, Dec 02, 2010 at 07:51:26AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 08:06:35PM +0300, Vasiliy Kulikov wrote:
>> >count = n / sizeof(int);
>> > - if (count > LIRCBUF_SIZE || count % 2 == 0)
>> > + if (count
On Dec 2, 2010, at 10:00 AM, Jarod Wilson wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 02, 2010 at 07:51:26AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 08:06:35PM +0300, Vasiliy Kulikov wrote:
>>> count = n / sizeof(int);
>>> - if (count > LIRCBUF_SIZE || count % 2 == 0)
>>> + if (count > LIRCBUF_SIZ
On Thu, Dec 02, 2010 at 07:51:26AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 08:06:35PM +0300, Vasiliy Kulikov wrote:
> > count = n / sizeof(int);
> > - if (count > LIRCBUF_SIZE || count % 2 == 0)
> > + if (count > LIRCBUF_SIZE || count % 2 == 0 || n % sizeof(int) != 0)
>
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 08:06:35PM +0300, Vasiliy Kulikov wrote:
> count = n / sizeof(int);
> - if (count > LIRCBUF_SIZE || count % 2 == 0)
> + if (count > LIRCBUF_SIZE || count % 2 == 0 || n % sizeof(int) != 0)
^^^
On Nov 26, 2010, at 12:06 PM, Vasiliy Kulikov wrote:
> 'n' may be bigger than MAX_INT*sizeof(int), if so checking of truncated
> (int)(n/sizeof(int)) for LIRCBUF_SIZE overflow and then using nontruncated
> 'count'
> doesn't make sense. Also n may be up to sizeof(int)-1 bytes bigger than
> expec
'n' may be bigger than MAX_INT*sizeof(int), if so checking of truncated
(int)(n/sizeof(int)) for LIRCBUF_SIZE overflow and then using nontruncated
'count'
doesn't make sense. Also n may be up to sizeof(int)-1 bytes bigger than
expected,
so check value of (n % sizeof(int)) too.
Signed-off-by: Va
