[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <2006-10-03-18-45-35+trackit+sam@rfc1149.net>
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2006 18:45:35 +0200
From: Samuel Tardieu <sam@...1149.net>
To: Jean Tourrilhes <jt@....hp.com>
Cc: Pavel Roskin <proski@....org>,
"John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.18-mm2 - oops in cache_alloc_refill()
On 3/10, Jean Tourrilhes wrote:
| > I suggest that you revert the memset() to IW_ESSID_MAX_SIZE+1 so that
| > the last byte is cleared as well. Or am I missing something?
|
| No, that would bring back the slab/memory overflow we are
| trying to get rid of.
Then I am puzzled by the function declaration:
static int orinoco_hw_get_essid(struct orinoco_private *priv, int *active,
char buf[IW_ESSID_MAX_SIZE+1])
Do you mean that this function is called with a buf parameter which
doesn't have the expected size? (as far as the function declaration is
concerned) Shouldn't the declaration be changed to
static int orinoco_hw_get_essid(struct orinoco_private *priv, int *active,
char buf[IW_ESSID_MAX_SIZE])
then to reflect the reality? (it won't change the code but would be
clearer from a documentation point of view)
Sam
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists