hi,
according to LXR there are several places where the check is >AX25_MAX_DIGIS instead of >=.

any takers ?

re,
 wh


Am 25.11.2011 12:22, schrieb walter harms:

Am 25.11.2011 10:09, schrieb Ralf Baechle:

quoted

nr_route.ndigis is unsigned int so the nr_route.ndigis < 0 expression is
never true and can be dropped.  Doing the nr_ax25_dev_get call later
allows the nr_route.ndigis test to bail out without having to dev_put.

Signed-off-by: Ralf Baechle <redacted>
Cc: Thomas Osterried <redacted>
---
 net/netrom/nr_route.c |    6 ++----
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/netrom/nr_route.c b/net/netrom/nr_route.c
index 8d7716c..2cf3301 100644
--- a/net/netrom/nr_route.c
+++ b/net/netrom/nr_route.c

@@ -670,12 +670,10 @@ int nr_rt_ioctl(unsigned int cmd, void __user *arg)
 	case SIOCADDRT:
 		if (copy_from_user(&nr_route, arg, sizeof(struct nr_route_struct)))
 			return -EFAULT;
-		if ((dev = nr_ax25_dev_get(nr_route.device)) == NULL)
+		if (nr_route.ndigis > AX25_MAX_DIGIS)
 			return -EINVAL;
-		if (nr_route.ndigis < 0 || nr_route.ndigis > AX25_MAX_DIGIS) {
-			dev_put(dev);
+		if ((dev = nr_ax25_dev_get(nr_route.device)) == NULL)
 			return -EINVAL;
-		}
 		switch (nr_route.type) {
 		case NETROM_NODE:
 			if (strnlen(nr_route.mnemonic, 7) == 7) {

I realy do not know if that matters but some use AX25_MAX_DIGIS as array
and therefore it should be >=AX25_MAX_DIGIS.

struct rose_route_struct {
         rose_address    address;
        unsigned short  mask;
        ax25_address    neighbour;
        char            device[16];
         unsigned char   ndigis;
         ax25_address    digipeaters[AX25_MAX_DIGIS];
  };
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-hams" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html