> From: Dan Carpenter [mailto:dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Saturday, January 11, 2014 1:59 AM > To: Kirsher, Jeffrey T > Cc: kernel-janitors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; e1000-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > Allan, Bruce W; Brandeburg, Jesse; Wei Yongjun; Ronciak, John > Subject: [E1000-devel] [patch v2] i40e: potential array underflow in > i40e_vc_process_vf_msg() > > If "vf_id" is smaller than hw->func_caps.vf_base_id then it leads to an > array underflow of the pf->vf[] array. This is unlikely to happen unless > the hardware is bad, but it's a small change and it silences a static > checker warning. > > Fixes: 7efa84b7abc1 ('i40e: support VFs on PFs other than 0') > Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > v2: rebased. commit message updated. > Thanks Dan, I have applied it to Jeff's tree. It still did not apply cleanly but I went ahead and spun a new patch with the change to get it into the queue. Not sure what was going on, only visible difference I could see is the original tree seemed to contain: --------------------------------------------------------- u32 v_retval, u8 *msg, u16 msglen) { --------------------------------------------------------- While the patch was looking for: ------------------------------------------------------------ u32 v_retval, u8 *msg, u16 msglen) { ------------------------------------------------------------ -- 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
