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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <1493920071.22125.37.camel@perches.com> Date: Thu, 04 May 2017 10:47:51 -0700 From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, garsilva@...eddedor.com Cc: kuznet@....inr.ac.ru, jmorris@...ei.org, yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org, kaber@...sh.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [net-ipv4] question about arguments position On Thu, 2017-05-04 at 12:46 -0400, David Miller wrote: > From: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <garsilva@...eddedor.com> > Date: Thu, 04 May 2017 11:07:54 -0500 > > > While looking into Coverity ID 1357474 I ran into the following piece > > of code at net/ipv4/inet_diag.c:392: > > Because it's been this way since at least 2005, it doesn't matter if > the order is correct or not. What's there is the locked in behavior > exposed to userspace and changing it will break things for people. Adding a few comments around the code about why it is this way will help avoid future questions.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists