On Tue, Jan 27, 2004 at 11:02:25AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 26, 2004 at 07:28:03PM -0500, Adrian Drzewiecki wrote:
> > Looking over the code, I noticed something odd in
> > namedev.c:strcmp_pattern() --
> >
> > while (*p && (*p != ']'))
> > p ++;
> > return strcmp_pattern(p+1, s+1);
> >
> > If the pattern string is invalid, and is not terminated by a ']', then 'p'
> > will point at \0 and p+1 will be beyond the string.
>
> Yes, I think you are correct.
>
> Hm, Kay, any idea of the proper way to fix this? I've attached a patch
> below, but I don't think it is correct.
>
> while (*p && (*p != ']'))
> p++;
> - return strcmp_pattern(p+1, s+1);
> + if (*p)
> + return strcmp_pattern(p+1, s+1);
> + else
> + return 1;
> }
> }
Sure, it's perfectly correct. I'm wondering how Adrian found this.
We can use the return 1 at the end of the whole function, and asking
for the closing ']' is more descriptive, but it does the same.