[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20190411.140203.1367510571263899902.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2019 14:02:03 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: colin.king@...onical.com
Cc: dhowells@...hat.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dns: remove redundant zero length namelen check
From: Colin King <colin.king@...onical.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2019 13:59:12 +0100
> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
>
> The zero namelen check is redundant as it has already been checked
> for zero at the start of the function. Remove the redundant check.
>
> Addresses-Coverity: ("Logically Dead Code")
> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
Applied to net-next.
However it does look like two sets of semantics were considered.
In one case rejecting a zero namelen and in another having it
mean whatever the strings length is modulo the max of 256.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists