[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]
Re: Fedora Core 4 Test Update: kernel-2.6.14-1.1633_FC4
- From: Dave Jones <davej redhat com>
- To: "Marc Schwartz (via MN)" <mschwartz mn rr com>
- Cc: For testers of Fedora Core development releases <fedora-test-list redhat com>
- Subject: Re: Fedora Core 4 Test Update: kernel-2.6.14-1.1633_FC4
- Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2005 23:21:03 -0500
On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 05:31:53PM -0600, Marc Schwartz (via MN) wrote:
> >From kernel-2.6.12-1.1456_FC4:
>
> $ cat /proc/i8k
> 1.0 A38 ? 54 -22 1 -22 79260 -1 2
>
>
> >From kernel-2.6.14-1.1633_FC4:
>
> $ cat /proc/i8k
> 1.0 A38 52 -22 1 -22 77340 -1 2
Ok, that looks like unintentional breakage. I've brought this
up upstream. Will try and get any resulting fix backported to FC4
when that appears.
> What is different is the field that should show the service tag ID for
> the laptop. This is the '?' in the first instance (3rd field) and
> appears to be missing in the second.
>
> This would perhaps explain the SEGFAULT, since in reviewing the code in
> i8krellm.c for the __i8k_get_proc_info() function, there are a series of
> strcpy's, parsing the fields from the result of getting the /proc/i8k
> info.
That code is really quite icky, and screams "scanf" to me.
Whilst that kernel interface *shouldnt* change, things like this
do happen, and it could have taken defensive action instead of
being as fragile as it is.
Dave
[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]