[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090412.195604.19944866.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2009 19:56:04 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: grundler@...isc-linux.org
Cc: kyle@...artin.ca, netdev@...r.kernel.org, error27@...il.com
Subject: Re: Null dereference in uli526x_rx_packet()
From: Grant Grundler <grundler@...isc-linux.org>
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2009 20:45:05 -0600
> On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 11:59:31PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Grant Grundler <grundler@...isc-linux.org>
>> Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2009 23:35:13 -0600
>>
>> > On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 11:23:32PM -0400, Kyle McMartin wrote:
>> > > On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 10:47:54PM -0400, Kyle McMartin wrote:
>> > > > > I don't know if the right fix is to return like this patch does or to set
>> > > > > skb = rxptr->rx_skb_ptr again.
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Ick... that's a good catch. I'll have to think about this.
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > > I think this is alright, it at least keeps the original intent of the
>> > > code. I don't pretend to have figured it out yet though.
>> > >
>> > > I'll stare more at this Monday...
>> > >
>> > > I guess the real question is does anyone still have one of these
>> > > cards. I don't think I do, just the proper tulips. :/
>> >
>> > Ditto. AFAIK, I only have tulips.
>> >
>> > Patch below looks right to me. Clobbering the skb is certainly wrong.
>> >
>> > Acked-by: Grant Grundler <grundler@...isc-linux.org>
>>
>> It looks correct to me, can we get a proper submission with
>> signoffs etc.?
>
> Dave,
> Is that something I have to do or the original submitter?
I would like the original submitted to do this.
> Was the "Acked-by" appropriate for me to provide (as maintainer)?
Yes, it is of course fine.
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists