[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b6c5339f0902261528i7b581125k29927c3c5ac4fe4c@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 18:28:54 -0500
From: Bob Copeland <me@...copeland.com>
To: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...il.com>
Cc: linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>,
ath5k-devel@...ema.h4ckr.net
Subject: Re: [ath5k-devel] [PATCH 1/1] ath5k: fix hw rate index condition
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 6:19 PM, Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...il.com> wrote:
> On 27.2.2009 00:15, Bob Copeland wrote:
>> Speaking of, I think there's another potential oob array access at:
>>
>> if (rxs.rate_idx>= 0&& rs.rs_rate ==
>> sc->curband->bitrates[rxs.rate_idx].hw_value_short)
>> rxs.flag |= RX_FLAG_SHORTPRE;
>>
>> because sc->rate_idx is u8 instead of s8.
>
> strcmp("sc->rate_idx", "rxs.rate_idx") != 0 :)
>
> Or did I miss something?
:) Sorry, I should've been clearer.
hw_to_driver_rix() returns sc->rate_idx[x][y] as an int, and that
array is initialized to (u8)-1 for invalid rates. So, it can
return 255 if the hardware rate index (y) is bad, then the check
"rxs.rate_idx >= 0" would always be true, right? If it's not a
real bug yet, it likely will be one day :)
--
Bob Copeland %% www.bobcopeland.com
--
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