netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/5] sctp: Bring SCTP_MAXSEG socket option into ietf API extension compliance

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 25 Dec 2008 16:56:25 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	vladislav.yasevich@...com
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-sctp@...r.kernel.org,
	yjwei@...fujitsu.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/5] sctp: Bring SCTP_MAXSEG socket option
 into ietf API extension compliance

From: Vlad Yasevich <vladislav.yasevich@...com>
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2008 20:47:48 -0500

> From: Wei Yongjun <yjwei@...fujitsu.com>
> 
> Brings maxseg socket option set/get into line with the latest ietf socket
> extensions API draft, while maintaining backwards compatibility.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Wei Yongjun <yjwei@...fujitsu.com>
> Signed-off-by: Vlad Yasevich <vladislav.yasevich@...com>

Applied.  But I really dislike this scheme used by the compat code.
Half-way initializing a structure and then depending upon the logic in
the rest of the function to make sure the rest of the struct (the
uninitialized part) is never accessed?

Give me a break, programming, auditing, and bug fixing is hard enough
as it is without sloppy code like this.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html