Hello,
Sorry for this wrong subject(It should be v3 instead of v2),
please ignore this patch.
I will send a new one with the corrected subject.
Thanks,
Anmol
On Sun, Nov 8, 2020 at 12:27 AM Anmol Karn wrote:
>
> rose_send_frame() dereferences `neigh->dev` when called from
> rose_transmit_clear
rose_send_frame() dereferences `neigh->dev` when called from
rose_transmit_clear_request(), and the first occurrence of the
`neigh` is in rose_loopback_timer() as `rose_loopback_neigh`,
and it is initialized in rose_add_loopback_neigh() as NULL.
i.e when `rose_loopback_neigh` used in rose_loopback_
Hello Sir,
On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 01:04:27PM -0800, Saeed Mahameed wrote:
> On Thu, 2020-11-05 at 21:26 +0530, Anmol Karn wrote:
> > rose_send_frame() dereferences `neigh->dev` when called from
> > rose_transmit_clear_request(), and the first occurance of the `neigh`
> > is in rose_loopback_timer
On Thu, 2020-11-05 at 21:26 +0530, Anmol Karn wrote:
> rose_send_frame() dereferences `neigh->dev` when called from
> rose_transmit_clear_request(), and the first occurance of the `neigh`
> is in rose_loopback_timer() as `rose_loopback_neigh`, and it is
> initialized
> in rose_add_loopback_neigh()
rose_send_frame() dereferences `neigh->dev` when called from
rose_transmit_clear_request(), and the first occurance of the `neigh`
is in rose_loopback_timer() as `rose_loopback_neigh`, and it is initialized
in rose_add_loopback_neigh() as NULL. i.e when `rose_loopback_neigh` used in
rose_loopback_
5 matches
Mail list logo
