Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 28 Nov 2014 10:29:02 +0000
From:      bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org
To:        freebsd-threads@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   [Bug 193367] [panic] sleeping thread
Message-ID:  <bug-193367-16-TK0OZVNda5@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-193367-16@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
References:  <bug-193367-16@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193367

Konstantin Belousov <kib@FreeBSD.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |kib@FreeBSD.org

--- Comment #10 from Konstantin Belousov <kib@FreeBSD.org> ---
(In reply to Eygene Ryabinkin from comment #8)
> Looks like there is at least off-by-one access to the driver-specific ioctl
> array, http://codelabs.ru/fbsd/patches/drm2/fix-drm_drv-off-by-one.diff,
> since max_ioctl is not a number of a highest supported ioctl number, but
> rather a size of driver's ioctl array.

I think that the patch is wrong, and there is no off-by-one bug.  At least in
i915 case, max_ioctl is initialized as nitems(i915_ioctls), which is the number
of array elements.  Applying your patch, the last ioctl in the driver-specific
array becomes inaccessible.  As an easier test, consider what would happen
after your change if array consists of single element.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-193367-16-TK0OZVNda5>