linux-kernel - Re: linux-4.6/net/kcm/kcmsock.c:1508: 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: <CAM_iQpUYa8brHBf-aFLzgF6duBEnvAzejJ=i1Of0RsNDDhKMxQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 17 May 2016 09:49:32 -0700
From:	Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	David Binderman <linuxdev.baldrick@...il.com>,
	Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, dcb314@...mail.com
Subject: Re: linux-4.6/net/kcm/kcmsock.c:1508: bad if test ?

On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 9:44 AM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> From: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
> Date: Tue, 17 May 2016 09:04:21 -0700
>
>> On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 11:40 AM, David Binderman
>> <linuxdev.baldrick@...il.com> wrote:
>>> Hello there,
>>>
>>> linux-4.6/net/kcm/kcmsock.c:1508]: (style) Checking if unsigned
>>> variable 'copied' is less than zero.
>>>
>>> Source code is
>>>
>>>     if (copied < 0) {
>>>
>>> but
>>>
>>>    size_t copied;
>>>
>>> Suggest code rework.
>>
>> Thanks for the report! I think the following patch is enough:
>>
>> diff --git a/net/kcm/kcmsock.c b/net/kcm/kcmsock.c
>> index 40662d73..8bfc390 100644
>> --- a/net/kcm/kcmsock.c
>> +++ b/net/kcm/kcmsock.c
>> @@ -1483,7 +1483,7 @@ static ssize_t kcm_splice_read(struct socket
>> *sock, loff_t *ppos,
>>         long timeo;
>>         struct kcm_rx_msg *rxm;
>>         int err = 0;
>> -       size_t copied;
>> +       int copied;
>
> Or 'ssize_t' since that is the return type of this function.

skb_splice_bits() is still declared as int:

int skb_splice_bits(struct sk_buff *skb, struct sock *sk, unsigned int
offset,
...

But yeah, we could change it to ssize_t as well, perhaps in a
separated patch?