Hi, On Mon, May 21, 2012, Paulo Alcantara wrote: > From: Claudio Takahasi <claudio.takahasi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > This patch removes the hard-coded address type for the BLE device > created from the storage. > --- > src/adapter.c | 10 +++++++--- > 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/src/adapter.c b/src/adapter.c > index dafe595..1ca21e6 100644 > --- a/src/adapter.c > +++ b/src/adapter.c > @@ -1940,13 +1940,17 @@ static void create_stored_device_from_primary(char *key, char *value, > struct btd_adapter *adapter = user_data; > struct btd_device *device; > GSList *services, *uuids, *l; > + char address[18]; > + uint8_t bdaddr_type; > + > + if (sscanf(key, "%17s#%hhu", address, &bdaddr_type) < 2) > + bdaddr_type = BDADDR_LE_PUBLIC; That's not safe. What if sscanf returns 0 or a negative value? In that case the address variable will remain uninitialized (which is why you should have just followed my suggestion of testing for < 1 and returning in such a case). Thinking more about this situation I'm not sure if it's any better to allow creation of old entries since you won't be able to remove them anyway: the remove code looks for a bdaddr#type key which won't exist and adding code to look for both types of keys is just bloating the code base for a minor benefit. So maybe your initial patch of failing in the case of sscanf returning < 2 is good enough after all. Johan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-bluetooth" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
