On Mon, 2013-07-29 at 23:01 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 12:44:32PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > > On Mon, 2013-07-29 at 22:36 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > > opt.__reserved isn't cleared so we leak a byte of stack information. > > [] > > > diff --git a/net/sched/sch_cbq.c b/net/sched/sch_cbq.c > > [] > > > @@ -1469,6 +1469,7 @@ static int cbq_dump_wrr(struct sk_buff *skb, struct cbq_class *cl) > > > opt.allot = cl->allot; > > > opt.priority = cl->priority + 1; > > > opt.cpriority = cl->cpriority + 1; > > > + opt.__reserved = 0; > > > opt.weight = cl->weight; > > > if (nla_put(skb, TCA_CBQ_WRROPT, sizeof(opt), &opt)) > > > goto nla_put_failure; > > > > Alignment isn't guaranteed here so it'd > > probably be better with a memset. > > > > Hm... Which arches would align it differently? Hey Dan. None so far as I know, but what difference does it make when it's a general correctness issue? -- 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
