Hi Ravi,
On 1 November 2013 14:11, Johan Hedberg <johan.hedberg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Ravi,
>
> On Fri, Nov 01, 2013, Ravi kumar Veeramally wrote:
>> If condition checks number of arguments properly but still executes
>> EXEC command. It should display error message and return.
>> ---
>> android/client/if-bt.c | 11 +++++++----
>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/android/client/if-bt.c b/android/client/if-bt.c
>> index 3d97458..2c3cc4a 100644
>> --- a/android/client/if-bt.c
>> +++ b/android/client/if-bt.c
>> @@ -719,12 +719,15 @@ static void pin_reply_p(int argc, const char **argv)
>> RETURN_IF_NULL(if_bluetooth);
>> VERIFY_ADDR_ARG(2, &addr);
>>
>> - if (argc > 3) {
>> - accept = 1;
>> - pin_len = strlen(argv[3]);
>> - memcpy(pin.pin, argv[3], pin_len);
>> + if (argc != 4) {
>> + haltest_error("Usage <address> <pin>\n");
>> + return;
>> }
>>
>> + accept = 1;
>> + pin_len = strlen(argv[3]);
>> + memcpy(pin.pin, argv[3], pin_len);
>> +
>> EXEC(if_bluetooth->pin_reply, &addr, accept, pin_len, &pin);
>
> It seems to me that the original code might have been trying to do (if
> it hadn't been broken like it now is) a negative pin reply in the case
> that no parameter was given. At least I don't see any other code trying
> to call if_bluetooth->pin_reply with accept=1 in haltest. So I'd
> consider fixing that instead.
Idea here was: no pin given set accept to 0, so user would not need to
type accept argument at all.
What is missing though, is initialization of accept to 0.
--
Jerzy
--
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
