The net-XXX in the subject was supposed to be net-next btw. I did check
that it only applied to net-next but I messed up the subject... :/
On Sun, Jun 11, 2023 at 06:04:31PM +0200, Christian Marangi wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 10:20:55AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > The caller, netdev_trig_activate(), passes an uninitialized value for
> > *rules. This function sets bits to one but it doesn't zero out any
> > bits so there is a potential for uninitialized data to be used.
> > Zero out the *rules at the start of the function.
> >
> > Fixes: e0256648c831 ("net: dsa: qca8k: implement hw_control ops")
> > Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Thanks for the fix but I wonder if this should be better fixed in
> netdev_trig_activate? By setting the mode as 0 directly there?
>
> I assume other dev implementing the get ops would do the same mistake.
Yes. You're obviously right on this. I'm not sure what I was thinking.
I will resend.
regards,
dan carpenter
