[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100317213504.GA7433@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 23:35:04 +0200
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To: David Stevens <dlstevens@...ibm.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
David Woodhouse <David.Woodhouse@...el.com>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Paul Moore <paul.moore@...com>, sri@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] tun: add ioctl to modify vnet header size
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 02:10:11PM -0700, David Stevens wrote:
> Shouldn't we enforce a maximum too? Esp. if overflow/underflow
> will break any of the checks when it's used.
>
> +-DLS
So the maximum is MAX_INT :)
I don't think it can break any checks that aren't
already broken - what do you have in mind?
--
MST
--
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