lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2016 11:57:58 -0400 From: "Levin, Alexander" <alexander.levin@...izon.com> To: Sunil Kovvuri <sunil.kovvuri@...il.com>, "Levin, Alexander" <alexander.levin@...izon.com> CC: "sgoutham@...ium.com" <sgoutham@...ium.com>, "rric@...nel.org" <rric@...nel.org>, "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: thunderx: correct bound check in nic_config_loopback On 07/31/2016 12:41 PM, Sunil Kovvuri wrote: > Thanks for finding. > A much better fix would be, > > - if (lbk->vf_id > MAX_LMAC) > + if (lbk->vf_id >= nic->num_vf_en) > return -1; > > where 'num_vf_en' reflects the exact number of physical interfaces or > LMACs on the system. Right. I see quite a few more places that compare to MAX_LMAC vs num_vf_en. What was the reasoning behind it then? Thanks, Sasha
Powered by blists - more mailing lists