On 03/13/2017 10:32 AM, Wu, Songjun wrote:
>
>
> On 3/13/2017 17:25, Hans Verkuil wrote:
>> On 03/13/2017 06:53 AM, Wu, Songjun wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/9/2017 18:57, Hans Verkuil wrote:
Hi Songjun,
On 08/03/17 03:25, Wu, Songjun wrote:
> Hi Colin,
>
> Thank you for your
On 3/13/2017 17:25, Hans Verkuil wrote:
On 03/13/2017 06:53 AM, Wu, Songjun wrote:
On 3/9/2017 18:57, Hans Verkuil wrote:
Hi Songjun,
On 08/03/17 03:25, Wu, Songjun wrote:
Hi Colin,
Thank you for your comment.
It is a bug, will be fixed in the next patch.
Do you mean that you will prov
On 03/13/2017 06:53 AM, Wu, Songjun wrote:
>
>
> On 3/9/2017 18:57, Hans Verkuil wrote:
>> Hi Songjun,
>>
>> On 08/03/17 03:25, Wu, Songjun wrote:
>>> Hi Colin,
>>>
>>> Thank you for your comment.
>>> It is a bug, will be fixed in the next patch.
>>
>> Do you mean that you will provide a new patc
On 3/9/2017 18:57, Hans Verkuil wrote:
Hi Songjun,
On 08/03/17 03:25, Wu, Songjun wrote:
Hi Colin,
Thank you for your comment.
It is a bug, will be fixed in the next patch.
Do you mean that you will provide a new patch for this? Is there anything
wrong with this patch? It seems reasonable
On 3/9/2017 19:50, Colin Ian King wrote:
On 09/03/17 11:49, walter harms wrote:
Am 09.03.2017 11:57, schrieb Hans Verkuil:
Hi Songjun,
On 08/03/17 03:25, Wu, Songjun wrote:
Hi Colin,
Thank you for your comment.
It is a bug, will be fixed in the next patch.
Do you mean that you will pro
Am 09.03.2017 11:57, schrieb Hans Verkuil:
> Hi Songjun,
>
> On 08/03/17 03:25, Wu, Songjun wrote:
>> Hi Colin,
>>
>> Thank you for your comment.
>> It is a bug, will be fixed in the next patch.
>
> Do you mean that you will provide a new patch for this? Is there anything
> wrong with this patc
On 09/03/17 11:49, walter harms wrote:
>
>
> Am 09.03.2017 11:57, schrieb Hans Verkuil:
>> Hi Songjun,
>>
>> On 08/03/17 03:25, Wu, Songjun wrote:
>>> Hi Colin,
>>>
>>> Thank you for your comment.
>>> It is a bug, will be fixed in the next patch.
>>
>> Do you mean that you will provide a new patc
Hi Songjun,
On 08/03/17 03:25, Wu, Songjun wrote:
> Hi Colin,
>
> Thank you for your comment.
> It is a bug, will be fixed in the next patch.
Do you mean that you will provide a new patch for this? Is there anything
wrong with this patch? It seems reasonable to me.
Regards,
Hans
>
>
Hi Colin,
Thank you for your comment.
It is a bug, will be fixed in the next patch.
On 3/7/2017 22:30, Colin King wrote:
From: Colin Ian King
The are only HIST_ENTRIES worth of entries in hist_entry however the
for-loop is iterating one too many times leasing to a read access off
the end off
From: Colin Ian King
The are only HIST_ENTRIES worth of entries in hist_entry however the
for-loop is iterating one too many times leasing to a read access off
the end off the array ctrls->hist_entry. Fix this by iterating by
the correct number of times.
Detected by CoverityScan, CID#1415279 (
10 matches
Mail list logo