On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 08:04:36PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > We don't set "resp.reserved". Since it's at the end of the struct that > means we don't have to copy it to the user. > > Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx> > > diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c b/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c > index 8000fff..43dfb84 100644 > --- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c > +++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c > @@ -619,7 +619,8 @@ static struct ib_ucontext *mlx5_ib_alloc_ucontext(struct ib_device *ibdev, > > resp.tot_uuars = req.total_num_uuars; > resp.num_ports = dev->mdev.caps.num_ports; > - err = ib_copy_to_udata(udata, &resp, sizeof(resp)); > + err = ib_copy_to_udata(udata, &resp, > + sizeof(resp) - sizeof(resp.reserved)); > if (err) > goto out_uars; > I don't have strong opinion on this one. The title of the patch is stack info leak but the only leak of a reserved field. Other opinions? -- 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
