On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 04:42:49PM +0200, Frans Klaver wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 5:33 AM, Darren Hart wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 09, 2014 at 10:50:08AM +0200, Paul Bolle wrote:
> >> Hi Darren,
> >>
> >> On Sat, 2014-09-06 at 23:17 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >> > On Friday, September 05,
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 5:33 AM, Darren Hart wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 09, 2014 at 10:50:08AM +0200, Paul Bolle wrote:
>> Hi Darren,
>>
>> On Sat, 2014-09-06 at 23:17 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> > On Friday, September 05, 2014 07:17:57 PM Darren Hart wrote:
>> > > On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 09:08:0
On Tue, Sep 09, 2014 at 10:50:08AM +0200, Paul Bolle wrote:
> Hi Darren,
>
> On Sat, 2014-09-06 at 23:17 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Friday, September 05, 2014 07:17:57 PM Darren Hart wrote:
> > > On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 09:08:08AM +0200, Paul Bolle wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > > static ss
Hi Darren,
On Sat, 2014-09-06 at 23:17 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Friday, September 05, 2014 07:17:57 PM Darren Hart wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 09:08:08AM +0200, Paul Bolle wrote:
> > [...]
> > > static ssize_t store_sys_acpi(struct device *dev, int cm,
> > > @@ -278,12 +276,13
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 12:53:25AM +0200, Frans Klaver wrote:
> In store_sys_acpi, if count equals zero, or parse_arg()s sscanf call
> fails, 'value' remains possibly uninitialized. In that case 'value'
> shouldn't be used to produce the store_sys_acpi()s return value.
>
> Only test the return val
On Friday, September 05, 2014 07:17:57 PM Darren Hart wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 09:08:08AM +0200, Paul Bolle wrote:
> > On Thu, 2014-09-04 at 00:53 +0200, Frans Klaver wrote:
> > > In store_sys_acpi, if count equals zero, or parse_arg()s sscanf call
> > > fails, 'value' remains possibly unin
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 09:08:08AM +0200, Paul Bolle wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-09-04 at 00:53 +0200, Frans Klaver wrote:
> > In store_sys_acpi, if count equals zero, or parse_arg()s sscanf call
> > fails, 'value' remains possibly uninitialized. In that case 'value'
> > shouldn't be used to produce the
On Thu, 2014-09-04 at 16:40 +0200, Frans Klaver wrote:
> I'll I fire up my eeepc and see what I can figure out. Should I take
> Pauls patch and see how it fits into this?
I haven't followed the conversation you're having with Greg, but I would
be grateful if you'd test _just_ my patch. Unless some
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 4:10 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 08:46:40AM +0200, Frans Klaver wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 3:14 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
>> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 05:49:47PM -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
>> >> On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 12:53:25AM +020
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 08:46:40AM +0200, Frans Klaver wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 3:14 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 05:49:47PM -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
> >> On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 12:53:25AM +0200, Frans Klaver wrote:
> >> > In store_sys_acpi, if count equals
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Paul Bolle wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-09-04 at 00:53 +0200, Frans Klaver wrote:
>> In store_sys_acpi, if count equals zero, or parse_arg()s sscanf call
>> fails, 'value' remains possibly uninitialized. In that case 'value'
>> shouldn't be used to produce the store_sys_ac
On Thu, 2014-09-04 at 00:53 +0200, Frans Klaver wrote:
> In store_sys_acpi, if count equals zero, or parse_arg()s sscanf call
> fails, 'value' remains possibly uninitialized. In that case 'value'
> shouldn't be used to produce the store_sys_acpi()s return value.
>
> Only test the return value of s
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 3:14 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 05:49:47PM -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 12:53:25AM +0200, Frans Klaver wrote:
>> > In store_sys_acpi, if count equals zero, or parse_arg()s sscanf call
>> > fails, 'value' remains possibly u
On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 05:49:47PM -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 12:53:25AM +0200, Frans Klaver wrote:
> > In store_sys_acpi, if count equals zero, or parse_arg()s sscanf call
> > fails, 'value' remains possibly uninitialized. In that case 'value'
> > shouldn't be used to prod
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 12:53:25AM +0200, Frans Klaver wrote:
> In store_sys_acpi, if count equals zero, or parse_arg()s sscanf call
> fails, 'value' remains possibly uninitialized. In that case 'value'
> shouldn't be used to produce the store_sys_acpi()s return value.
>
> Only test the return val
In store_sys_acpi, if count equals zero, or parse_arg()s sscanf call
fails, 'value' remains possibly uninitialized. In that case 'value'
shouldn't be used to produce the store_sys_acpi()s return value.
Only test the return value of set_acpi() if we can actually call it.
Return rv otherwise.
Signe
16 matches
Mail list logo
