All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [patch] zd1211rw: fix potential array underflow
@ 2010-02-27  6:12 ` Dan Carpenter
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Dan Carpenter @ 2010-02-27  6:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Daniel Drake
  Cc: Ulrich Kunitz, John W. Linville, Johannes Berg,
	Luis R. Rodriguez, André Goddard Rosa, Benoit PAPILLAULT,
	linux-wireless, netdev, linux-kernel, kernel-janitors

The first chunk fixes a debugging assert to print a warning about array underflows.
The second chunk corrects a potential array underflow.  I also removed an assert
in the second chunk because it can no longer happen.

Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <error27@gmail.com>
---
This was found by a static check and compile tested only.  Please review carefully.

diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/zd1211rw/zd_mac.c b/drivers/net/wireless/zd1211rw/zd_mac.c
index f14deb0..ead2f2c 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/zd1211rw/zd_mac.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/zd1211rw/zd_mac.c
@@ -350,7 +350,7 @@ static void zd_mac_tx_status(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, struct sk_buff *skb,
 	first_idx = info->status.rates[0].idx;
 	ZD_ASSERT(0<=first_idx && first_idx<ARRAY_SIZE(zd_retry_rates));
 	retries = &zd_retry_rates[first_idx];
-	ZD_ASSERT(0<=retry && retry<=retries->count);
+	ZD_ASSERT(1 <= retry && retry <= retries->count);
 
 	info->status.rates[0].idx = retries->rate[0];
 	info->status.rates[0].count = 1; // (retry > 1 ? 2 : 1);
@@ -360,7 +360,7 @@ static void zd_mac_tx_status(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, struct sk_buff *skb,
 		info->status.rates[i].count = 1; // ((i==retry-1) && success ? 1:2);
 	}
 	for (; i<IEEE80211_TX_MAX_RATES && i<retry; i++) {
-		info->status.rates[i].idx = retries->rate[retry-1];
+		info->status.rates[i].idx = retries->rate[retry - 1];
 		info->status.rates[i].count = 1; // (success ? 1:2);
 	}
 	if (i<IEEE80211_TX_MAX_RATES)
@@ -424,12 +424,10 @@ void zd_mac_tx_failed(struct urb *urb)
 		first_idx = info->status.rates[0].idx;
 		ZD_ASSERT(0<=first_idx && first_idx<ARRAY_SIZE(zd_retry_rates));
 		retries = &zd_retry_rates[first_idx];
-		if (retry < 0 || retry > retries->count) {
+		if (retry <= 0 || retry > retries->count)
 			continue;
-		}
 
-		ZD_ASSERT(0<=retry && retry<=retries->count);
-		final_idx = retries->rate[retry-1];
+		final_idx = retries->rate[retry - 1];
 		final_rate = zd_rates[final_idx].hw_value;
 
 		if (final_rate != tx_status->rate) {

^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [patch] zd1211rw: fix potential array underflow
@ 2010-02-27  6:12 ` Dan Carpenter
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Dan Carpenter @ 2010-02-27  6:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Daniel Drake
  Cc: Ulrich Kunitz, John W. Linville, Johannes Berg,
	Luis R. Rodriguez, André Goddard Rosa, Benoit PAPILLAULT,
	linux-wireless, netdev, linux-kernel, kernel-janitors

The first chunk fixes a debugging assert to print a warning about array underflows.
The second chunk corrects a potential array underflow.  I also removed an assert
in the second chunk because it can no longer happen.

Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <error27@gmail.com>
---
This was found by a static check and compile tested only.  Please review carefully.

diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/zd1211rw/zd_mac.c b/drivers/net/wireless/zd1211rw/zd_mac.c
index f14deb0..ead2f2c 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/zd1211rw/zd_mac.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/zd1211rw/zd_mac.c
@@ -350,7 +350,7 @@ static void zd_mac_tx_status(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, struct sk_buff *skb,
 	first_idx = info->status.rates[0].idx;
 	ZD_ASSERT(0<=first_idx && first_idx<ARRAY_SIZE(zd_retry_rates));
 	retries = &zd_retry_rates[first_idx];
-	ZD_ASSERT(0<=retry && retry<=retries->count);
+	ZD_ASSERT(1 <= retry && retry <= retries->count);
 
 	info->status.rates[0].idx = retries->rate[0];
 	info->status.rates[0].count = 1; // (retry > 1 ? 2 : 1);
@@ -360,7 +360,7 @@ static void zd_mac_tx_status(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, struct sk_buff *skb,
 		info->status.rates[i].count = 1; // ((i=retry-1) && success ? 1:2);
 	}
 	for (; i<IEEE80211_TX_MAX_RATES && i<retry; i++) {
-		info->status.rates[i].idx = retries->rate[retry-1];
+		info->status.rates[i].idx = retries->rate[retry - 1];
 		info->status.rates[i].count = 1; // (success ? 1:2);
 	}
 	if (i<IEEE80211_TX_MAX_RATES)
@@ -424,12 +424,10 @@ void zd_mac_tx_failed(struct urb *urb)
 		first_idx = info->status.rates[0].idx;
 		ZD_ASSERT(0<=first_idx && first_idx<ARRAY_SIZE(zd_retry_rates));
 		retries = &zd_retry_rates[first_idx];
-		if (retry < 0 || retry > retries->count) {
+		if (retry <= 0 || retry > retries->count)
 			continue;
-		}
 
-		ZD_ASSERT(0<=retry && retry<=retries->count);
-		final_idx = retries->rate[retry-1];
+		final_idx = retries->rate[retry - 1];
 		final_rate = zd_rates[final_idx].hw_value;
 
 		if (final_rate != tx_status->rate) {

^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] zd1211rw: fix potential array underflow
  2010-02-27  6:12 ` Dan Carpenter
@ 2010-02-27 14:20   ` Benoit PAPILLAULT
  -1 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Benoit PAPILLAULT @ 2010-02-27 14:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Dan Carpenter, Daniel Drake, Ulrich Kunitz, John W. Linville,
	Johannes Berg, Luis R. Rodriguez, André Goddard Rosa,
	Benoit PAPILLAULT, linux-wireless, netdev, linux-kernel,
	kernel-janitors

Dan Carpenter a écrit :
> The first chunk fixes a debugging assert to print a warning about array underflows.
> The second chunk corrects a potential array underflow.  I also removed an assert
> in the second chunk because it can no longer happen.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <error27@gmail.com>
> ---
> This was found by a static check and compile tested only.  Please review carefully.
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/zd1211rw/zd_mac.c b/drivers/net/wireless/zd1211rw/zd_mac.c
> index f14deb0..ead2f2c 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/zd1211rw/zd_mac.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/zd1211rw/zd_mac.c
> @@ -350,7 +350,7 @@ static void zd_mac_tx_status(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, struct sk_buff *skb,
>  	first_idx = info->status.rates[0].idx;
>  	ZD_ASSERT(0<=first_idx && first_idx<ARRAY_SIZE(zd_retry_rates));
>  	retries = &zd_retry_rates[first_idx];
> -	ZD_ASSERT(0<=retry && retry<=retries->count);
> +	ZD_ASSERT(1 <= retry && retry <= retries->count);
>   
Note: normal hardware always report a tx_status->retry >= 1. There are 2 
code paths to initialize retry itself : either tx_status is NULL and 
then retry=1 (so we are safe), or tx_status is not NULL and retry = 
tx_status->retry + success >=1 (so we are safe again).

However, I wonder how we should handle if it happens that the HW reports 
a tx_status->retry = 0. I think ZD_ASSERT purpose is to catch 
programming errors, not bogus hardware. Comments?
>  
>  	info->status.rates[0].idx = retries->rate[0];
>  	info->status.rates[0].count = 1; // (retry > 1 ? 2 : 1);
> @@ -360,7 +360,7 @@ static void zd_mac_tx_status(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, struct sk_buff *skb,
>  		info->status.rates[i].count = 1; // ((i==retry-1) && success ? 1:2);
>  	}
>  	for (; i<IEEE80211_TX_MAX_RATES && i<retry; i++) {
> -		info->status.rates[i].idx = retries->rate[retry-1];
> +		info->status.rates[i].idx = retries->rate[retry - 1];
>  		info->status.rates[i].count = 1; // (success ? 1:2);
>  	}
>  	if (i<IEEE80211_TX_MAX_RATES)
> @@ -424,12 +424,10 @@ void zd_mac_tx_failed(struct urb *urb)
>  		first_idx = info->status.rates[0].idx;
>  		ZD_ASSERT(0<=first_idx && first_idx<ARRAY_SIZE(zd_retry_rates));
>  		retries = &zd_retry_rates[first_idx];
> -		if (retry < 0 || retry > retries->count) {
> +		if (retry <= 0 || retry > retries->count)
>  			continue;
> -		}
>  
> -		ZD_ASSERT(0<=retry && retry<=retries->count);
> -		final_idx = retries->rate[retry-1];
> +		final_idx = retries->rate[retry - 1];
>  		final_rate = zd_rates[final_idx].hw_value;
>  
>  		if (final_rate != tx_status->rate) {
>
>   
Acked-by: Benoit Papillault <benoit.papillault@free.fr>

Regards,
Benoit


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] zd1211rw: fix potential array underflow
  2010-02-27  6:12 ` Dan Carpenter
  (?)
  (?)
@ 2010-02-27 14:20 ` Benoit PAPILLAULT
  -1 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Benoit PAPILLAULT @ 2010-02-27 14:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Dan Carpenter, Daniel Drake, Ulrich Kunitz, John W. Linville,
	Johannes Berg

Dan Carpenter a écrit :
> The first chunk fixes a debugging assert to print a warning about array underflows.
> The second chunk corrects a potential array underflow.  I also removed an assert
> in the second chunk because it can no longer happen.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <error27@gmail.com>
> ---
> This was found by a static check and compile tested only.  Please review carefully.
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/zd1211rw/zd_mac.c b/drivers/net/wireless/zd1211rw/zd_mac.c
> index f14deb0..ead2f2c 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/zd1211rw/zd_mac.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/zd1211rw/zd_mac.c
> @@ -350,7 +350,7 @@ static void zd_mac_tx_status(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, struct sk_buff *skb,
>  	first_idx = info->status.rates[0].idx;
>  	ZD_ASSERT(0<=first_idx && first_idx<ARRAY_SIZE(zd_retry_rates));
>  	retries = &zd_retry_rates[first_idx];
> -	ZD_ASSERT(0<=retry && retry<=retries->count);
> +	ZD_ASSERT(1 <= retry && retry <= retries->count);
>   
Note: normal hardware always report a tx_status->retry >= 1. There are 2 
code paths to initialize retry itself : either tx_status is NULL and 
then retry=1 (so we are safe), or tx_status is not NULL and retry = 
tx_status->retry + success >=1 (so we are safe again).

However, I wonder how we should handle if it happens that the HW reports 
a tx_status->retry = 0. I think ZD_ASSERT purpose is to catch 
programming errors, not bogus hardware. Comments?
>  
>  	info->status.rates[0].idx = retries->rate[0];
>  	info->status.rates[0].count = 1; // (retry > 1 ? 2 : 1);
> @@ -360,7 +360,7 @@ static void zd_mac_tx_status(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, struct sk_buff *skb,
>  		info->status.rates[i].count = 1; // ((i==retry-1) && success ? 1:2);
>  	}
>  	for (; i<IEEE80211_TX_MAX_RATES && i<retry; i++) {
> -		info->status.rates[i].idx = retries->rate[retry-1];
> +		info->status.rates[i].idx = retries->rate[retry - 1];
>  		info->status.rates[i].count = 1; // (success ? 1:2);
>  	}
>  	if (i<IEEE80211_TX_MAX_RATES)
> @@ -424,12 +424,10 @@ void zd_mac_tx_failed(struct urb *urb)
>  		first_idx = info->status.rates[0].idx;
>  		ZD_ASSERT(0<=first_idx && first_idx<ARRAY_SIZE(zd_retry_rates));
>  		retries = &zd_retry_rates[first_idx];
> -		if (retry < 0 || retry > retries->count) {
> +		if (retry <= 0 || retry > retries->count)
>  			continue;
> -		}
>  
> -		ZD_ASSERT(0<=retry && retry<=retries->count);
> -		final_idx = retries->rate[retry-1];
> +		final_idx = retries->rate[retry - 1];
>  		final_rate = zd_rates[final_idx].hw_value;
>  
>  		if (final_rate != tx_status->rate) {
>
>   
Acked-by: Benoit Papillault <benoit.papillault@free.fr>

Regards,
Benoit


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] zd1211rw: fix potential array underflow
@ 2010-02-27 14:20   ` Benoit PAPILLAULT
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Benoit PAPILLAULT @ 2010-02-27 14:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Dan Carpenter, Daniel Drake, Ulrich Kunitz, John W. Linville,
	Johannes Berg, Luis R. Rodriguez, André Goddard Rosa,
	Benoit PAPILLAULT, linux-wireless, netdev, linux-kernel,
	kernel-janitors

Dan Carpenter a écrit :
> The first chunk fixes a debugging assert to print a warning about array underflows.
> The second chunk corrects a potential array underflow.  I also removed an assert
> in the second chunk because it can no longer happen.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <error27@gmail.com>
> ---
> This was found by a static check and compile tested only.  Please review carefully.
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/zd1211rw/zd_mac.c b/drivers/net/wireless/zd1211rw/zd_mac.c
> index f14deb0..ead2f2c 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/zd1211rw/zd_mac.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/zd1211rw/zd_mac.c
> @@ -350,7 +350,7 @@ static void zd_mac_tx_status(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, struct sk_buff *skb,
>  	first_idx = info->status.rates[0].idx;
>  	ZD_ASSERT(0<=first_idx && first_idx<ARRAY_SIZE(zd_retry_rates));
>  	retries = &zd_retry_rates[first_idx];
> -	ZD_ASSERT(0<=retry && retry<=retries->count);
> +	ZD_ASSERT(1 <= retry && retry <= retries->count);
>   
Note: normal hardware always report a tx_status->retry >= 1. There are 2 
code paths to initialize retry itself : either tx_status is NULL and 
then retry=1 (so we are safe), or tx_status is not NULL and retry = 
tx_status->retry + success >=1 (so we are safe again).

However, I wonder how we should handle if it happens that the HW reports 
a tx_status->retry = 0. I think ZD_ASSERT purpose is to catch 
programming errors, not bogus hardware. Comments?
>  
>  	info->status.rates[0].idx = retries->rate[0];
>  	info->status.rates[0].count = 1; // (retry > 1 ? 2 : 1);
> @@ -360,7 +360,7 @@ static void zd_mac_tx_status(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, struct sk_buff *skb,
>  		info->status.rates[i].count = 1; // ((i=retry-1) && success ? 1:2);
>  	}
>  	for (; i<IEEE80211_TX_MAX_RATES && i<retry; i++) {
> -		info->status.rates[i].idx = retries->rate[retry-1];
> +		info->status.rates[i].idx = retries->rate[retry - 1];
>  		info->status.rates[i].count = 1; // (success ? 1:2);
>  	}
>  	if (i<IEEE80211_TX_MAX_RATES)
> @@ -424,12 +424,10 @@ void zd_mac_tx_failed(struct urb *urb)
>  		first_idx = info->status.rates[0].idx;
>  		ZD_ASSERT(0<=first_idx && first_idx<ARRAY_SIZE(zd_retry_rates));
>  		retries = &zd_retry_rates[first_idx];
> -		if (retry < 0 || retry > retries->count) {
> +		if (retry <= 0 || retry > retries->count)
>  			continue;
> -		}
>  
> -		ZD_ASSERT(0<=retry && retry<=retries->count);
> -		final_idx = retries->rate[retry-1];
> +		final_idx = retries->rate[retry - 1];
>  		final_rate = zd_rates[final_idx].hw_value;
>  
>  		if (final_rate != tx_status->rate) {
>
>   
Acked-by: Benoit Papillault <benoit.papillault@free.fr>

Regards,
Benoit

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] zd1211rw: fix potential array underflow
  2010-02-27 14:20   ` Benoit PAPILLAULT
@ 2010-02-27 17:27     ` walter harms
  -1 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: walter harms @ 2010-02-27 17:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Benoit PAPILLAULT
  Cc: Dan Carpenter, Daniel Drake, Ulrich Kunitz, John W. Linville,
	Johannes Berg, Luis R. Rodriguez, André Goddard Rosa,
	linux-wireless, netdev, linux-kernel, kernel-janitors



Benoit PAPILLAULT schrieb:
> Dan Carpenter a écrit :
>> The first chunk fixes a debugging assert to print a warning about
>> array underflows.
>> The second chunk corrects a potential array underflow.  I also removed
>> an assert
>> in the second chunk because it can no longer happen.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <error27@gmail.com>
>> ---
>> This was found by a static check and compile tested only.  Please
>> review carefully.
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/zd1211rw/zd_mac.c
>> b/drivers/net/wireless/zd1211rw/zd_mac.c
>> index f14deb0..ead2f2c 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/zd1211rw/zd_mac.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/zd1211rw/zd_mac.c
>> @@ -350,7 +350,7 @@ static void zd_mac_tx_status(struct ieee80211_hw
>> *hw, struct sk_buff *skb,
>>      first_idx = info->status.rates[0].idx;
>>      ZD_ASSERT(0<=first_idx && first_idx<ARRAY_SIZE(zd_retry_rates));
>>      retries = &zd_retry_rates[first_idx];
>> -    ZD_ASSERT(0<=retry && retry<=retries->count);
>> +    ZD_ASSERT(1 <= retry && retry <= retries->count);
>>   
> Note: normal hardware always report a tx_status->retry >= 1. There are 2
> code paths to initialize retry itself : either tx_status is NULL and
> then retry=1 (so we are safe), or tx_status is not NULL and retry =
> tx_status->retry + success >=1 (so we are safe again).
> 
> However, I wonder how we should handle if it happens that the HW reports
> a tx_status->retry = 0. I think ZD_ASSERT purpose is to catch
> programming errors, not bogus hardware. Comments?


Simply assume the worst, so far i see the patch does not
add more code nor should it change normal behavier.
This will help to make the code more robust.

just my 2 cents,
 walter



>>  
>>      info->status.rates[0].idx = retries->rate[0];
>>      info->status.rates[0].count = 1; // (retry > 1 ? 2 : 1);
>> @@ -360,7 +360,7 @@ static void zd_mac_tx_status(struct ieee80211_hw
>> *hw, struct sk_buff *skb,
>>          info->status.rates[i].count = 1; // ((i==retry-1) && success
>> ? 1:2);
>>      }
>>      for (; i<IEEE80211_TX_MAX_RATES && i<retry; i++) {
>> -        info->status.rates[i].idx = retries->rate[retry-1];
>> +        info->status.rates[i].idx = retries->rate[retry - 1];
>>          info->status.rates[i].count = 1; // (success ? 1:2);
>>      }
>>      if (i<IEEE80211_TX_MAX_RATES)
>> @@ -424,12 +424,10 @@ void zd_mac_tx_failed(struct urb *urb)
>>          first_idx = info->status.rates[0].idx;
>>          ZD_ASSERT(0<=first_idx && first_idx<ARRAY_SIZE(zd_retry_rates));
>>          retries = &zd_retry_rates[first_idx];
>> -        if (retry < 0 || retry > retries->count) {
>> +        if (retry <= 0 || retry > retries->count)
>>              continue;
>> -        }
>>  
>> -        ZD_ASSERT(0<=retry && retry<=retries->count);
>> -        final_idx = retries->rate[retry-1];
>> +        final_idx = retries->rate[retry - 1];
>>          final_rate = zd_rates[final_idx].hw_value;
>>  
>>          if (final_rate != tx_status->rate) {
>>
>>   
> Acked-by: Benoit Papillault <benoit.papillault@free.fr>
> 
> Regards,
> Benoit
> 
> -- 
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
> kernel-janitors" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> 
> 

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] zd1211rw: fix potential array underflow
@ 2010-02-27 17:27     ` walter harms
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: walter harms @ 2010-02-27 17:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Benoit PAPILLAULT
  Cc: Dan Carpenter, Daniel Drake, Ulrich Kunitz, John W. Linville,
	Johannes Berg, Luis R. Rodriguez, André Goddard Rosa,
	linux-wireless, netdev, linux-kernel, kernel-janitors



Benoit PAPILLAULT schrieb:
> Dan Carpenter a écrit :
>> The first chunk fixes a debugging assert to print a warning about
>> array underflows.
>> The second chunk corrects a potential array underflow.  I also removed
>> an assert
>> in the second chunk because it can no longer happen.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <error27@gmail.com>
>> ---
>> This was found by a static check and compile tested only.  Please
>> review carefully.
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/zd1211rw/zd_mac.c
>> b/drivers/net/wireless/zd1211rw/zd_mac.c
>> index f14deb0..ead2f2c 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/zd1211rw/zd_mac.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/zd1211rw/zd_mac.c
>> @@ -350,7 +350,7 @@ static void zd_mac_tx_status(struct ieee80211_hw
>> *hw, struct sk_buff *skb,
>>      first_idx = info->status.rates[0].idx;
>>      ZD_ASSERT(0<=first_idx && first_idx<ARRAY_SIZE(zd_retry_rates));
>>      retries = &zd_retry_rates[first_idx];
>> -    ZD_ASSERT(0<=retry && retry<=retries->count);
>> +    ZD_ASSERT(1 <= retry && retry <= retries->count);
>>   
> Note: normal hardware always report a tx_status->retry >= 1. There are 2
> code paths to initialize retry itself : either tx_status is NULL and
> then retry=1 (so we are safe), or tx_status is not NULL and retry > tx_status->retry + success >=1 (so we are safe again).
> 
> However, I wonder how we should handle if it happens that the HW reports
> a tx_status->retry = 0. I think ZD_ASSERT purpose is to catch
> programming errors, not bogus hardware. Comments?


Simply assume the worst, so far i see the patch does not
add more code nor should it change normal behavier.
This will help to make the code more robust.

just my 2 cents,
 walter



>>  
>>      info->status.rates[0].idx = retries->rate[0];
>>      info->status.rates[0].count = 1; // (retry > 1 ? 2 : 1);
>> @@ -360,7 +360,7 @@ static void zd_mac_tx_status(struct ieee80211_hw
>> *hw, struct sk_buff *skb,
>>          info->status.rates[i].count = 1; // ((i=retry-1) && success
>> ? 1:2);
>>      }
>>      for (; i<IEEE80211_TX_MAX_RATES && i<retry; i++) {
>> -        info->status.rates[i].idx = retries->rate[retry-1];
>> +        info->status.rates[i].idx = retries->rate[retry - 1];
>>          info->status.rates[i].count = 1; // (success ? 1:2);
>>      }
>>      if (i<IEEE80211_TX_MAX_RATES)
>> @@ -424,12 +424,10 @@ void zd_mac_tx_failed(struct urb *urb)
>>          first_idx = info->status.rates[0].idx;
>>          ZD_ASSERT(0<=first_idx && first_idx<ARRAY_SIZE(zd_retry_rates));
>>          retries = &zd_retry_rates[first_idx];
>> -        if (retry < 0 || retry > retries->count) {
>> +        if (retry <= 0 || retry > retries->count)
>>              continue;
>> -        }
>>  
>> -        ZD_ASSERT(0<=retry && retry<=retries->count);
>> -        final_idx = retries->rate[retry-1];
>> +        final_idx = retries->rate[retry - 1];
>>          final_rate = zd_rates[final_idx].hw_value;
>>  
>>          if (final_rate != tx_status->rate) {
>>
>>   
> Acked-by: Benoit Papillault <benoit.papillault@free.fr>
> 
> Regards,
> Benoit
> 
> -- 
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
> kernel-janitors" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> 
> 
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2010-02-27 21:37 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2010-02-27  6:12 [patch] zd1211rw: fix potential array underflow Dan Carpenter
2010-02-27  6:12 ` Dan Carpenter
2010-02-27 14:20 ` Benoit PAPILLAULT
2010-02-27 14:20   ` Benoit PAPILLAULT
2010-02-27 17:27   ` walter harms
2010-02-27 17:27     ` walter harms
2010-02-27 14:20 ` Benoit PAPILLAULT

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.