> > On 12/07/2016 04:33 PM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > >Lustre is kind of a mess with regards to keeping user and kernel
> > >pointers separate. It's not going to be easy to fix.
> > Fair enough.
> > I am trying to make a contribution to drivers/staging using sparse.
> > With that in mind, do you s
On Wed, Dec 07, 2016 at 04:42:30PM +0100, Quentin Lambert wrote:
>
>
> On 12/07/2016 04:33 PM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> >Lustre is kind of a mess with regards to keeping user and kernel
> >pointers separate. It's not going to be easy to fix.
> Fair enough.
> I am trying to make a contribution to d
On Dec 7, 2016, at 10:20 AM, Quentin Lambert wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I am looking at the drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/llite/dir.c:
>
> 1469 /* Call mdc_iocontrol */
> 1470 rc = obd_iocontrol(LL_IOC_FID2MDTIDX, exp, sizeof(fid),
> &fid,
> 1471
On Dec 7, 2016, at 10:33 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> Lustre is kind of a mess with regards to keeping user and kernel
> pointers separate. It's not going to be easy to fix.
Actually I believe I made significant inroads in properly cleaning (almost?)
everything
in this area about a year ago (to
On 12/07/2016 04:33 PM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
Lustre is kind of a mess with regards to keeping user and kernel
pointers separate. It's not going to be easy to fix.
Fair enough.
I am trying to make a contribution to drivers/staging using sparse.
With that in mind, do you still fill I should kee
Lustre is kind of a mess with regards to keeping user and kernel
pointers separate. It's not going to be easy to fix.
regards,
dan carpenter
On Wed, Dec 07, 2016 at 04:20:06PM +0100, Quentin Lambert wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I am looking at the drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/llite/dir.c:
>
> 1469 /* Call mdc_iocontrol */
> 1470 rc = obd_iocontrol(LL_IOC_FID2MDTIDX, exp,
> sizeof(fid), &fid,
> 1471
Hi all,
I am looking at the drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/llite/dir.c:
1469 /* Call mdc_iocontrol */
1470 rc = obd_iocontrol(LL_IOC_FID2MDTIDX, exp,
sizeof(fid), &fid,
1471&index);
1472 if (rc)
and sparse says
On 12/05/2016 11:58 PM, Oleg Drokin wrote:
I guess it's a false positive?
Yes, probably.
Thank you for the explanation though, I don't fully understand all this yet,
I am still learning.
Sorry for the noise.
Quentin
On Dec 2, 2016, at 12:33 PM, Quentin Lambert wrote:
> lnet_ipif_enumerate was assigning a pointer from kernel space to user
> space. This patch uses copy_to_user to properly do that assignment.
I guess it's a false positive?
While lnet_sock_ioctl()->kernel_sock_unlocked_ioctl() does call into t
On Fri, Dec 02, 2016 at 06:33:32PM +0100, Quentin Lambert wrote:
> lnet_ipif_enumerate was assigning a pointer from kernel space to user
> space. This patch uses copy_to_user to properly do that assignment.
Put the exact warning message here.
>
> Signed-off-by: Quentin Lambert
> ---
> shouldn'
lnet_ipif_enumerate was assigning a pointer from kernel space to user
space. This patch uses copy_to_user to properly do that assignment.
Signed-off-by: Quentin Lambert
---
shouldn't we be using ifc_req instead of ifc_buf?
drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/lnet/lib-socket.c |8 +++-
1 file c
12 matches
Mail list logo
