On Thu, Sep 06, 2012 at 08:07:58AM -0700, Dan Carpenter wrote:
[...]
> >for (j=0; j <= i ;j++ ) {
>^^
> The count up loops are prone to the exact same off by one bugs. ;)
> You've got one in your sample code. Plus I'd have to declare
> another variable and send a v2 patch
On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 04:11:01PM +0200, walter harms wrote:
>
>
> Am 05.09.2012 14:34, schrieb Dan Carpenter:
> > We should decrement "i" before doing the free_irq(). If we call this
> > because request_threaded_irq() failed then we don't want to free the
> > thing which failed. Or in the cas
Am 05.09.2012 14:34, schrieb Dan Carpenter:
> We should decrement "i" before doing the free_irq(). If we call this
> because request_threaded_irq() failed then we don't want to free the
> thing which failed. Or in the case where we get here because
> power_supply_register() failed then the orig
We should decrement "i" before doing the free_irq(). If we call this
because request_threaded_irq() failed then we don't want to free the
thing which failed. Or in the case where we get here because
power_supply_register() failed then the original codes does a read past
the end of the array.
Sig
4 matches
Mail list logo
