linux-kernel - v6 superceded it [was: Re: [PATCH][v5] netlink: have netlink per-protocol bind function return an error code.]

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]

Date:	Wed, 26 Mar 2014 16:09:22 -0400
From:	Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@...hat.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	linux-audit@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	eparis@...hat.com, sgrubb@...hat.com, hadi@...atatu.com
Subject: v6 superceded it [was: Re: [PATCH][v5] netlink: have netlink
 per-protocol bind function return an error code.]

On 14/03/26, David Miller wrote:
> From: Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@...hat.com>
> Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2014 16:59:23 -0400
> 
> > +				if (err)
> > +					if (!nlk->portid)
> > +						netlink_remove(sk);
> > +					for (int undo = 0; undo < i; undo++)
> > +						if (nlk->netlink_unbind)
> > +							nlk->netlink_unbind(undo);
> > +					return err;
> 
> Take a good long stare at that code block for a while.
> 
> Looks like you forgot the braces to delineate the code block.

Did you notice all the attempts to send a corrected patch?  v6 finally
got it right (sent Monday).  Sorry for all the noise.  Serve me right
for not sitting on my hands before sending the email for a bit while I
checked it.

> This also means you really haven't tested this patch :-)

It was tested, but the patched code wasn't actually checked in.  It was
still in my tree.  I ran "git commit --amend" more than once, forgetting
the "-a", and didn't carefully enough inspect the resulting patch.

> Please also DO NOT declare local variables in a for() statement,
> this is not c++.

It is above the for now (also in v6).

- RGB

--
Richard Guy Briggs <rbriggs@...hat.com>
Senior Software Engineer, Kernel Security, AMER ENG Base Operating Systems, Red Hat
Remote, Ottawa, Canada
Voice: +1.647.777.2635, Internal: (81) 32635, Alt: +1.613.693.0684x3545
--
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/