On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 04:56:48PM +0200, Petr Kulhavy wrote:
> This is not a fix of an actual issue rather than prevention of a potential 
> issue.

No, your patch introduces an issue that wasn't there before.

> @@ -1589,7 +1589,7 @@ int clock_switch_phc(struct clock *c, int phc_index)
>       clockid_t clkid;
>       char phc[32];
>  
> -     snprintf(phc, 31, "/dev/ptp%d", phc_index);
> +     snprintf(phc, sizeof(phc), "/dev/ptp%d", phc_index);

You replaced length 31 with 32.  The code uses 31 for a reason.


Thanks, but no thanks,

Richard

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Linuxptp-devel mailing list
Linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-devel

Reply via email to