[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2017 19:05:08 +0100
From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
To: "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@....inr.ac.ru>,
Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc: kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: NACK: [PATCH][net-next] ipv6: fix incorrect bitwise operator used on
rt6i_flags
On 10/10/17 18:55, Colin King wrote:
> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
>
> The use of the | operator always leads to true on the expression
> (rt->rt6i_flags | RTF_CACHE) which looks rather suspect to me. I
> believe this is fixed by using & instead to just check the
> RTF_CACHE entry bit.
>
> Detected by CoverityScan, CID#1457747 ("Wrong operator used")
>
> Fixes: 35732d01fe31 ("ipv6: introduce a hash table to store dst cache")
> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
> ---
> net/ipv6/route.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/ipv6/route.c b/net/ipv6/route.c
> index 6db1541eaa7b..0556d1ee189c 100644
> --- a/net/ipv6/route.c
> +++ b/net/ipv6/route.c
> @@ -1425,7 +1425,7 @@ int rt6_remove_exception_rt(struct rt6_info *rt)
> int err;
>
> if (!from ||
> - !(rt->rt6i_flags | RTF_CACHE))
> + !(rt->rt6i_flags & RTF_CACHE))
> return -EINVAL;
>
> if (!rcu_access_pointer(from->rt6i_exception_bucket))
>
Nack that, seems like this occurs more than once and I failed to spot
the others.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists