On Mon, Aug 23, 2010, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> How did you find this one? From a quick look it seems that the pattern
> that name is intentionally overflowed to access extension is still there
> in some places. So if this caused some real bug, I think we'll have to
> fix the other ones, too.
Compiler
Am 22.08.2010 00:47, schrieb Loïc Minier:
> Signed-off-by: Loïc Minier
Thanks, applied to the block patch.
How did you find this one? From a quick look it seems that the pattern
that name is intentionally overflowed to access extension is still there
in some places. So if this caused some real b
Signed-off-by: Loïc Minier
---
block/vvfat.c |2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/block/vvfat.c b/block/vvfat.c
index 6d61c2e..365332a 100644
--- a/block/vvfat.c
+++ b/block/vvfat.c
@@ -512,7 +512,7 @@ static inline uint8_t fat_chksum(const direntry_t* entry)
