[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAEO-vhFzEo12uU7EBOb6r6J7Ludhe4HNNGvfN71fSDQRmR16pQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2024 12:27:28 -0700
From: "Everest K.C." <everestkc@...restkc.com.np>
To: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
Cc: steffen.klassert@...unet.com, herbert@...dor.apana.org.au,
davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][next] xfrm: Add error handling when nla_put_u32() returns
an error
On Wed, Nov 13, 2024 at 3:59 AM Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2024 at 04:36:06PM -0700, Everest K.C. wrote:
> > Error handling is missing when call to nla_put_u32() fails.
> > Handle the error when the call to nla_put_u32() returns an error.
> >
> > The error was reported by Coverity Scan.
> > Report:
> > CID 1601525: (#1 of 1): Unused value (UNUSED_VALUE)
> > returned_value: Assigning value from nla_put_u32(skb, XFRMA_SA_PCPU, x->pcpu_num)
> > to err here, but that stored value is overwritten before it can be used
> >
> > Fixes: 1ddf9916ac09 ("xfrm: Add support for per cpu xfrm state handling.")
> > Signed-off-by: Everest K.C. <everestkc@...restkc.com.np>
>
> Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
>
> For future reference, I think the appropriate target for this tree
> is ipsec-next rather than next.
>
> Subject: [PATCH ipsec-next] xfrm: ...
Should I send a patch to ipsec-next ?
>
> ...
- Everest K.C.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists