To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Path: not-for-mail
From: daw@cs.berkeley.edu (David Wagner)
Newsgroups: isaac.lists.linux-kernel
Subject: Re: [S390] cio: kernel stack overflow.
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 17:09:12 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Message-ID: <ed4gno$d29$1@taverner.cs.berkeley.edu>
References: <20060830124047.GA22276@skybase>
Reply-To: daw-usenet@taverner.cs.berkeley.edu (David Wagner)
NNTP-Posting-Host: taverner.cs.berkeley.edu
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 17:09:12 +0000 (UTC)
Originator: daw@taverner.cs.berkeley.edu (David Wagner)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 967
Lines: 18

Have you checked that in all cases all fields of the struct have
been overwritten?  For instance, look at this:

Martin Schwidefsky  wrote:
>-	chp->dev = (struct device) {
>-		.parent  = &css[0]->device,
>-		.release = chp_release,
>-	};
>+	chp->dev.parent = &css[0]->device;
>+	chp->dev.release = chp_release;

Doesn't this leave chp->dev.bus still holding whatever old value it
had laying around before?  Unless I'm missing something, it looks to
me like this diff causes a change in the semantics of the code.

Perhaps it would be better to memset() the entire struct (chp->dev, in
this case) to zero, before assigning to individual fields, so there is
no possibility of old remnant data still being left laying around?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/