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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Sun, 27 Nov 2016 19:56:02 -0700
From:   David Ahern <dsa@...ulusnetworks.com>
To:     张胜举 <zhangshengju@...s.chinamobile.com>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [net,v2] neigh: fix the loop index error in neigh dump

On 11/27/16 7:53 PM, 张胜举 wrote:
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: David Ahern [mailto:dsa@...ulusnetworks.com]
>> Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 10:39 AM
>> To: 张胜举 <zhangshengju@...s.chinamobile.com>;
>> netdev@...r.kernel.org
>> Subject: Re: [net,v2] neigh: fix the loop index error in neigh dump
>>
>> On 11/27/16 7:34 PM, 张胜举 wrote:
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: David Ahern [mailto:dsa@...ulusnetworks.com]
>>>> Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 10:10 AM
>>>> To: Zhang Shengju <zhangshengju@...s.chinamobile.com>;
>>>> netdev@...r.kernel.org
>>>> Subject: Re: [net,v2] neigh: fix the loop index error in neigh dump
>>>>
>>>> On 11/27/16 6:32 PM, Zhang Shengju wrote:
>>>>> Loop index in neigh dump function is not updated correctly under
>>>>> some circumstances, this patch will fix it.
>>>>
>>>> What's an example?
>>>
>>> If dev is filtered out, the original code goes to next loop without
>>> updating loop index 'idx'.
>>
>> And you have a use case with missing or redundant data? Or is your
>> comment based on a review of code only?
> It's on my code review. No use case currently,  this is uncommon to happen.
> 
> 
>>
>>>> You are completely rewriting the dump loops.
>>>
>>> I put 'idx++' into for loop,  so I replace 'goto' with 'continue'.
>>> The other change is style related.
>>
>> A "fixes" should not include 'style related' changes.
> Okay, I will send another version without style changes.
> 

Personally, I think you need to produce a use case that fails before sending another patch. I have not seen a problem with this code.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists