Adam Lee <adam....@canonical.com> writes:
> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c
> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c
> @@ -5401,9 +5401,12 @@ static int led_write(char *buf)
> return -ENODEV;
>
> while ((cmd = next_cmd(&buf))) {
> - if (sscanf(cmd, "%d", &led) != 1 || led < 0 || led > 15)
> + if (sscanf(cmd, "%d", &led) != 1)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> + if (!tpacpi_leds[led].led)
> + return -ENODEV;
This looks risky. Why did you remove the index sanity check? What will
happen now if the input is e.g "-1" or "42"?
BTW, the magic number 15 should probably be (TPACPI_LED_NUMLEDS - 1)
instead.
Bjørn
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows:
Build for Windows Store.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
ibm-acpi-devel mailing list
ibm-acpi-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ibm-acpi-devel
