On 1/6/21 1:09 PM, David Howells wrote:
> Tom Rix wrote:
>
>> On 1/6/21 11:44 AM, David Howells wrote:
>>> Tom Rix wrote:
>>>
These two loops iterate over the same data, i believe returning here is all
that is needed.
>>> But if the first loop is made to support a new type, but the se
Tom Rix wrote:
> On 1/6/21 11:44 AM, David Howells wrote:
> > Tom Rix wrote:
> >
> >> These two loops iterate over the same data, i believe returning here is all
> >> that is needed.
> > But if the first loop is made to support a new type, but the second loop is
> > missed, it will then likely o
On 1/6/21 11:44 AM, David Howells wrote:
> Tom Rix wrote:
>
>> These two loops iterate over the same data, i believe returning here is all
>> that is needed.
> But if the first loop is made to support a new type, but the second loop is
> missed, it will then likely oops. Besides, the compiler s
Tom Rix wrote:
> These two loops iterate over the same data, i believe returning here is all
> that is needed.
But if the first loop is made to support a new type, but the second loop is
missed, it will then likely oops. Besides, the compiler should optimise both
paths together.
David
On 1/6/21 9:40 AM, David Howells wrote:
> David Howells wrote:
>
>> How about this?
>> ...
>> Fix the second loop so that it doesn't encode the size and type of an
>> unsupported token, but rather just ignore it as does the first loop.
> Actually, a better way is probably just to error o
David Howells wrote:
> How about this?
> ...
> Fix the second loop so that it doesn't encode the size and type of an
> unsupported token, but rather just ignore it as does the first loop.
Actually, a better way is probably just to error out in this case. This
should only happen if a new
How about this?
David
---
commit 5d370a9db65a6fae82f09a009430ae40c564b0ef
Author: David Howells
Date: Wed Jan 6 16:21:40 2021 +
rxrpc: Fix handling of an unsupported token type in rxrpc_read()
Clang static analysis reports the following:
net/rxrpc/key.c:657:11: warnin
On 1/4/21 4:50 AM, David Howells wrote:
> t...@redhat.com wrote:
>
>> -switch (token->security_index) {
>> -case RXRPC_SECURITY_RXKAD:
>> ...
>> -switch (token->security_index) {
>> -case RXRPC_SECURITY_RXKAD:
> These switches need to be kept. Ther
t...@redhat.com wrote:
> - switch (token->security_index) {
> - case RXRPC_SECURITY_RXKAD:
> ...
> - switch (token->security_index) {
> - case RXRPC_SECURITY_RXKAD:
These switches need to be kept. There's another security type on the way.
See:
htt
From: Tom Rix
clang static analysis reports this problem
net/rxrpc/key.c:657:11: warning: Assigned value is garbage or undefined
toksize = toksizes[tok++];
^ ~~~
rxrpc_read() contains two loops. The first loop calculates the token
sizes and s
10 matches
Mail list logo
