On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 05:07:24PM +0100, walter harms wrote: > > > Am 07.12.2012 12:10, schrieb Dan Carpenter: > > We pass IFLA_BRPORT_MAX to nla_parse_nested() so we need > > IFLA_BRPORT_MAX + 1 elements. Also Smatch complains that we read past > > the end of the array when in br_set_port_flag() when it's called with > > IFLA_BRPORT_FAST_LEAVE. > > > > > > I have no clue why nla_parse_nested() need IFLA_BRPORT_MAX elements. > but the majory of loop look like > for(i=0;i<max;++) > most programmers will think this way. > So it seems the place to fix is nla_parse_nested(). > doing not so is asking for trouble (in the long run). > At least this function needs a big warning label that (max-1) > is actually needed. > Yeah, nla_parse_nested() is actually documented already. regards, dan carpenter -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
