On Tue, 2016-08-23 at 07:21 -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-08-23 at 14:41 +0100, Luis Henriques wrote:
> >
> > > > From: Avijit Kanti Das <avijitn...@codeaurora.org>
> >
> > memset() the structure ethtool_wolinfo that has padded bytes
> > but the padded bytes have not been zeroed out.
> >
> > Change-Id: If3fd2d872a1b1ab9521d937b86a29fc468a8bbfe
> > > > Signed-off-by: Avijit Kanti Das <avijitn...@codeaurora.org>
> > ---
> > net/core/ethtool.c | 4 +++-
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/net/core/ethtool.c b/net/core/ethtool.c
> > index 977489820eb9..6bf6362e8114 100644
> > --- a/net/core/ethtool.c
> > +++ b/net/core/ethtool.c
> > @@ -1435,11 +1435,13 @@ static int ethtool_reset(struct net_device *dev,
> > char __user *useraddr)
> >
> > static int ethtool_get_wol(struct net_device *dev, char __user *useraddr)
> > {
> > - struct ethtool_wolinfo wol = { .cmd = ETHTOOL_GWOL };
> > + struct ethtool_wolinfo wol;
> >
> > if (!dev->ethtool_ops->get_wol)
> > return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> >
> > + memset(&wol, 0, sizeof(struct ethtool_wolinfo));
> > + wol.cmd = ETHTOOL_GWOL;
> > dev->ethtool_ops->get_wol(dev, &wol);
> >
> > if (copy_to_user(useraddr, &wol, sizeof(wol)))
>
> This would suggest a compiler bug to me.Unfortunately the C standard does not guarantee that padding bytes are initialised (at least not for automatic storage). [...] > If we can not rely on such constructs, we have hundreds of similar > patches to submit. [...] Many such patches have been applied and can be found with: git log --author=kangji...@gmail.com Ben. -- Ben Hutchings The program is absolutely right; therefore, the computer must be wrong.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
