Am Mittwoch, den 07.03.2018, 13:41 -0800 schrieb sathyanarayanan
kuppuswamy :
>
> On 03/07/2018 12:58 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> > So I don't see why your check is needed, what other code path would ever
> > call this function in a way that the bounds check would be needed?
> void usb_serial_generic_read_bulk_callback(struct urb *urb)
>
> 385 for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(port->read_urbs); ++i) {
> 386 if (urb == port->read_urbs[i])
> 387 break;
> 388 }
>
> In here, after this for loop is done (without any matching urb), i value
> will be equal to ARRAY_SIZE(port->read_urbs). So there is a possibility
> of usb_serial_generic_submit_read_urb() getting called with this invalid
> index.
If this happens the function was called for a stray URB.
Your check comes to late. We have called set_bit with an invalid index
and other shit.
We definitely do not just want to return an error in that case.
Regards
Oliver
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
