On 01/07/2011 02:51 PM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 01:44:15PM +0100, Andreas Oberritter wrote:
>> Nack. You're changing an interface to userspace. Please add a check to
>> av7110_ca.c instead.
>>
>
> Ok. I've done that and resent the patch.
Thanks. I'm OK with the patch, but
On Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 16:51 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> But just for my own understanding, why is it wrong to change an int to
> an unsigned int in the userspace API? Who would notice?
E.g. the same check in userspace (var < 0). If var has changed the sign
then the result would differ.
--
On Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 01:44:15PM +0100, Andreas Oberritter wrote:
> Nack. You're changing an interface to userspace. Please add a check to
> av7110_ca.c instead.
>
Ok. I've done that and resent the patch.
But just for my own understanding, why is it wrong to change an int to
an unsigned int i
On 01/06/2011 08:41 PM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> In the CA_GET_SLOT_INFO ioctl, we only check whether "num" is too large,
> but we don't check if it's negative.
>
> drivers/media/dvb/ttpci/av7110_ca.c
>278ca_slot_info_t *info=(ca_slot_info_t *)parg;
>279
>280
In the CA_GET_SLOT_INFO ioctl, we only check whether "num" is too large,
but we don't check if it's negative.
drivers/media/dvb/ttpci/av7110_ca.c
278 ca_slot_info_t *info=(ca_slot_info_t *)parg;
279
280 if (info->num > 1)
281 return -EINVAL;
282
