linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Revert "platform/x86/toshiba-apci.c possible bad if test?"

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.GSO.2.00.1408202114140.8435@hutcs>
Date:	Wed, 20 Aug 2014 21:16:52 +0300 (EEST)
From:	Ari Sundholm <asundhol@...hut.fi>
To:	platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org
cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Matthew Garrett <matthew.garrett@...ula.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "platform/x86/toshiba-apci.c possible bad if
 test?"


On Wed, 20 Aug 2014, Ari Sundholm wrote:

> -	if (sscanf(buf, "%i", &mode) != 1  || (mode != 2 || mode != 1))
> +	if (sscanf(buf, "%i", &mode) != 1 && (mode != 2 || mode != 1))
>  		return -EINVAL;

Note that the condition still looks wrong even after the revert, as
(mode != 2 || mode != 1) is always true. Anybody guess what the actual 
intent was?

Best regards,
Ari Sundholm
asundhol@...hut.fi
--
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/