linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] net/wireless/nl80211.c: Avoid call to genlmsg

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1101281515410.8546@pc-004.diku.dk>
Date:	Fri, 28 Jan 2011 15:16:53 +0100 (CET)
From:	Julia Lawall <julia@...u.dk>
To:	Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
Cc:	kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
	"John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] net/wireless/nl80211.c: Avoid call to genlmsg_cancel

On Fri, 28 Jan 2011, Johannes Berg wrote:

> On Fri, 2011-01-28 at 15:17 +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
> 
> > diff --git a/net/wireless/nl80211.c b/net/wireless/nl80211.c
> > index 9b62710..864ddfb 100644
> > --- a/net/wireless/nl80211.c
> > +++ b/net/wireless/nl80211.c
> > @@ -2718,7 +2718,7 @@ static int nl80211_get_mesh_config(struct sk_buff *skb,
> >  	hdr = nl80211hdr_put(msg, info->snd_pid, info->snd_seq, 0,
> >  			     NL80211_CMD_GET_MESH_CONFIG);
> >  	if (!hdr)
> > -		goto nla_put_failure;
> > +		goto out;
> 
> 
> > @@ -2954,7 +2955,7 @@ static int nl80211_get_reg(struct sk_buff *skb, struct genl_info *info)
> >  	hdr = nl80211hdr_put(msg, info->snd_pid, info->snd_seq, 0,
> >  			     NL80211_CMD_GET_REG);
> >  	if (!hdr)
> > -		goto nla_put_failure;
> > +		goto put_failure;
> >  
> >  	NLA_PUT_STRING(msg, NL80211_ATTR_REG_ALPHA2,
> >  		cfg80211_regdomain->alpha2);
> 
> Seems fine. Actually, since the message is freed anyhow, the call to
> genlmsg_cancel is *completely* unnecessary, I just put it in to make it
> nest better and not rely on it not having side effects.
> 
> But why did you call the label differently? :)

Because out is already used in this case, and I didn't want to change all 
of the other occurrences of nla_put_failure.  It's a bit sloppy though, 
because this code is the actual nla_put_failure.  I can change it if you 
prefer.

julia
--
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/