On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 07:40:38PM +0200, Jean-Yves Migeon wrote:
>
> On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 12:11:32 -0500, Eric Haszlakiewicz
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 09, 2010 at 10:49:05PM +0200, Jean-Yves Migeon wrote:
> >> Note also that I applied the spatch against sys/; the rest of src could
> >> get a scan.
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 19:11:56 +0200, Matthias Drochner
wrote:
> jeanyves.mig...@free.fr said:
>> But the NULL deref fixes will go in eventually, and I will probably
>> ask for a pull up too ;)
>
> But then...
>
> algo = esp_algorithm_lookup(sav->alg_enc);
> - if (!algo) {
> +
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 12:11:32 -0500, Eric Haszlakiewicz
wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 09, 2010 at 10:49:05PM +0200, Jean-Yves Migeon wrote:
>> Note also that I applied the spatch against sys/; the rest of src could
>> get a scan. But I would prefer to look for other static analyzers
first,
>> perhaps there
jeanyves.mig...@free.fr said:
> But the NULL deref fixes will go in eventually, and I will probably
> ask for a pull up too ;)
But then...
algo = esp_algorithm_lookup(sav->alg_enc);
- if (!algo) {
+ if (algo == NULL) {
ipseclog((LOG_ERR,
- "e
On Mon, Aug 09, 2010 at 10:49:05PM +0200, Jean-Yves Migeon wrote:
> Note also that I applied the spatch against sys/; the rest of src could
> get a scan. But I would prefer to look for other static analyzers first,
> perhaps there are more suitable (and faster) ones.
If you're talking about static
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 07:35:15 +0700, Robert Elz wrote:
> Date:Mon, 09 Aug 2010 18:19:28 +0200
> One obvious example is that it makes it much harder in the future to
> pullups of
> fixes to code in this area to earlier NetBSD versions - the diffs show
all
> of this meaningless churn as well
