On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 9:10 AM, Tetsuo Handa
wrote:
> Stephen Smalley wrote:
>> On Fri, 2017-06-30 at 10:56 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
>> > We accidentally return success instead of -ENOMEM on this failure
>> > path.
>> >
>> > Fixes: 409dcf31538a ("selinux: Add a cache for quicker retreival of
>
On 7/1/2017 9:42 AM, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 11:15 AM, Dan Jurgens wrote:
>> From: Daniel Jurgens
>>
>> ib_get_cached_subnet_prefix can technically fail, but the only way it
>> could is not possible based on the loop conditions. Check the return
>> value before using the varia
On Mon, Jul 03, 2017 at 07:03:54PM -0400, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 11:15 AM, Dan Jurgens wrote:
> > From: Daniel Jurgens
> >
> > ib_get_cached_subnet_prefix can technically fail, but the only way it
> > could is not possible based on the loop conditions. Check the return
> > va
From: Daniel Jurgens
ib_get_cached_subnet_prefix can technically fail, but the only way it
could is not possible based on the loop conditions. Check the return
value before using the variable sp to resolve a static analysis warning.
Fixes: 8f408ab64be6 ("selinux lsm IB/core: Implement LSM notifi
On 7/3/2017 6:03 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 11:15 AM, Dan Jurgens wrote:
>> From: Daniel Jurgens
>>
>> ib_get_cached_subnet_prefix can technically fail, but the only way it
>> could is not possible based on the loop conditions. Check the return
>> value before using the varia
On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 9:15 AM, Dan Jurgens wrote:
> From: Daniel Jurgens
>
> ib_get_cached_subnet_prefix can technically fail, but the only way it
> could is not possible based on the loop conditions. Check the return
> value before using the variable sp to resolve a static analysis warning.
>
>