On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 1:45 AM, David Miller <da...@davemloft.net> wrote: > From: Zhi Yong Wu <zwu.ker...@gmail.com> > Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2013 17:08:50 +0800 > >> From: Zhi Yong Wu <wu...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> >> >> Signed-off-by: Zhi Yong Wu <wu...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > Also applied and queued up for -stable, thanks. > > I noticed in these two cases that that min_t() adjustment of 'ret' > seems strange. I can't understand why it's needed. > > If, for example, tun_do_read() really did read more than 'len' > bytes: > > 1) That would write past the end of the buffer. > > 2) Writing a different value to the ->ki_pos would mean > that ->ki_pos is now inaccurate. > > Unless someone can explain why the min_t() is needed, we should remove > it. Yes, from my side, it seems to be impossible that ret is bigger than let or total_len. So we also remove the branch "if (ret > total_len) {...}" in xxx_rcvmsg(). If you hope to submit the patch for this, please let me know, thanks.
-- Regards, Zhi Yong Wu -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/