-----Original Message-----
From: Colin Ian King [mailto:colin.king@canonical.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2018 2:28 PM
To: Dreyfuss, Haim <redacted>; David S. Miller
[off-list ref]; Johannes Berg [off-list ref];
netdev@vger.kernel.org; linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: re: [PATCH] cfg80211: read wmm rules from regulatory database

Hi Haim,

I think there may be an issue with the commit:

From 230ebaa189af44d50dccb4a1846e39ca594e347b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
2001
From: Haim Dreyfuss <redacted>
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2018 13:24:09 +0300
Subject: [PATCH] cfg80211: read wmm rules from regulatory database

specifically in function: reg_copy_regd()

+       for (i = 0; i < src_regd->n_reg_rules; i++) {
                memcpy(&regd->reg_rules[i], &src_regd->reg_rules[i],
                       sizeof(struct ieee80211_reg_rule));
+               if (!src_regd->reg_rules[i].wmm_rule)
+                       continue;

+               regd->reg_rules[i].wmm_rule = d_wmm +
+                       (src_regd->reg_rules[i].wmm_rule - s_wmm) /
+                       sizeof(struct ieee80211_wmm_rule);
+       }

The pointer arithmetic (src_regd->reg_rules[i].wmm_rule - s_wmm) is
performed in terms of the size of struct ieee80211_wmm_rule and not in
bytes and I believe that the division by sizeof(struct
ieee80211_wmm_rule) is not required.

This issue was detected by static analysis with Coverity Scan,
CID#1467451 ("Extra sizeof expression"), 'suspicious_division'

I'm not 100% sure that is this a false positive or not, but I think it looks
incorrect to me.

Yeah you're right, this is not false positive.
Johannes already fixed that and Luca will probably send it in the coming week.