On 2014/11/18 15:50, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Michael Tokarev writes:
>
>> 15.11.2014 13:06, arei.gong...@huawei.com wrote:
>>> From: Gonglei
>>>
>>> In this false branch, fd will leak when it is zero.
>>> Change the testing condition.
>>
>> Why fd==0 is a concern here? It is a very unlikely
Michael Tokarev writes:
> 15.11.2014 13:06, arei.gong...@huawei.com wrote:
>> From: Gonglei
>>
>> In this false branch, fd will leak when it is zero.
>> Change the testing condition.
>
> Why fd==0 is a concern here? It is a very unlikely
> situation that fd0 will be picked - firstly because
>
15.11.2014 13:06, arei.gong...@huawei.com wrote:
> From: Gonglei
>
> In this false branch, fd will leak when it is zero.
> Change the testing condition.
Why fd==0 is a concern here? It is a very unlikely
situation that fd0 will be picked - firstly because
fd0 is almost always open, and second -
On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 06:06:40PM +0800, arei.gong...@huawei.com wrote:
> From: Gonglei
>
> In this false branch, fd will leak when it is zero.
> Change the testing condition.
>
> Signed-off-by: Gonglei
> ---
> net/l2tpv3.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
Reviewed-by:
From: Gonglei
In this false branch, fd will leak when it is zero.
Change the testing condition.
Signed-off-by: Gonglei
---
net/l2tpv3.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/net/l2tpv3.c b/net/l2tpv3.c
index 528d95b..b2b0fc0 100644
--- a/net/l2tpv3.c
+++ b/net/l2t
