| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20120814020111.GB26758@kroah.com> Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2012 19:01:11 -0700 From: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com> To: Ryan Mallon <rmallon@...il.com> Cc: Cruz Julian Bishop <cruzjbishop@...il.com>, swetland@...gle.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] Fixes a potential bug in android/logger.c On Thu, Aug 02, 2012 at 09:50:44AM +1000, Ryan Mallon wrote: > On 01/08/12 14:54, Cruz Julian Bishop wrote: > > Previously, when calling is_between(a, b, c), the calculation was wrong. > > It counted C as between A and B if C was equal to B, but not A. > > > > Example of this are: > > > > is_between(1, 10, 10) = 1 (Expected: 0) > > is_between(1, 10, 1) = 0 (Expected: 0) > > is_between(20, 10, 10) = 1 (Expected: 0) > > > > And so on and so forth. > > > > Obviously, ten is not a number between one and ten - only two to eight are, so I made this patch :) > > Is nine not a number between one and ten? :-p. > > The question with a patch like this is whether the function's > documentation, which says it returns 1 if a < c < b is wrong, or whether > the implementation, which does a < c <= b is wrong. If the documentation > is wrong, and something is relying on the current implementation, then > this patch might actually break things. I agree, which is correct? I'd stick with the code for now, care to fix the comment instead? greg k-h -- 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