| Message ID | 20151113142323.GB1445@mwanda (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 3:23 PM, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com> wrote: > There is a static checker warning here because "val" is controlled by > the user and we have a upper bound on it but allow negative numbers. > "val" appears to be a timeout in usec so this bug probably means we > have a longer timeout than we should. Let's fix this by changing "val" > to unsigned. > > Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com> > --- > Checkpatch has several complaints about this code but I left it as-is. > > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/mvsas/mv_init.c b/drivers/scsi/mvsas/mv_init.c > index 90fdf0e..675e7fa 100644 > --- a/drivers/scsi/mvsas/mv_init.c > +++ b/drivers/scsi/mvsas/mv_init.c > @@ -758,7 +758,7 @@ mvs_store_interrupt_coalescing(struct device *cdev, > struct device_attribute *attr, > const char *buffer, size_t size) > { > - int val = 0; > + unsigned int val = 0; > struct mvs_info *mvi = NULL; > struct Scsi_Host *shost = class_to_shost(cdev); > struct sas_ha_struct *sha = SHOST_TO_SAS_HA(shost); > @@ -766,7 +766,7 @@ mvs_store_interrupt_coalescing(struct device *cdev, > if (buffer == NULL) > return size; > > - if (sscanf(buffer, "%d", &val) != 1) > + if (sscanf(buffer, "%u", &val) != 1) > return -EINVAL; > > if (val >= 0x10000) { Looks good to me. Reviewed-by: Jack Wang <jinpu.wang@profitbricks.com>
>>>>> "Dan" == Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com> writes:
Dan> There is a static checker warning here because "val" is controlled
Dan> by the user and we have a upper bound on it but allow negative
Dan> numbers. "val" appears to be a timeout in usec so this bug
Dan> probably means we have a longer timeout than we should. Let's fix
Dan> this by changing "val" to unsigned.
Applied.
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/mvsas/mv_init.c b/drivers/scsi/mvsas/mv_init.c index 90fdf0e..675e7fa 100644 --- a/drivers/scsi/mvsas/mv_init.c +++ b/drivers/scsi/mvsas/mv_init.c @@ -758,7 +758,7 @@ mvs_store_interrupt_coalescing(struct device *cdev, struct device_attribute *attr, const char *buffer, size_t size) { - int val = 0; + unsigned int val = 0; struct mvs_info *mvi = NULL; struct Scsi_Host *shost = class_to_shost(cdev); struct sas_ha_struct *sha = SHOST_TO_SAS_HA(shost); @@ -766,7 +766,7 @@ mvs_store_interrupt_coalescing(struct device *cdev, if (buffer == NULL) return size; - if (sscanf(buffer, "%d", &val) != 1) + if (sscanf(buffer, "%u", &val) != 1) return -EINVAL; if (val >= 0x10000) {
There is a static checker warning here because "val" is controlled by the user and we have a upper bound on it but allow negative numbers. "val" appears to be a timeout in usec so this bug probably means we have a longer timeout than we should. Let's fix this by changing "val" to unsigned. Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com> --- Checkpatch has several complaints about this code but I left it as-is. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html