summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/drivers/net/netconsole.c
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorBreno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>2024-10-08 11:43:24 +0200
committerJakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>2024-10-10 04:42:43 +0200
commitd94785bb46b6167382b1de3290eccc91fa98df53 (patch)
tree44cc9992418b850c0704e01221a8f0d27296d735 /drivers/net/netconsole.c
parentnet: dsa: refuse cross-chip mirroring operations (diff)
downloadlinux-d94785bb46b6167382b1de3290eccc91fa98df53.tar.xz
linux-d94785bb46b6167382b1de3290eccc91fa98df53.zip
net: netconsole: fix wrong warning
A warning is triggered when there is insufficient space in the buffer for userdata. However, this is not an issue since userdata will be sent in the next iteration. Current warning message: ------------[ cut here ]------------ WARNING: CPU: 13 PID: 3013042 at drivers/net/netconsole.c:1122 write_ext_msg+0x3b6/0x3d0 ? write_ext_msg+0x3b6/0x3d0 console_flush_all+0x1e9/0x330 The code incorrectly issues a warning when this_chunk is zero, which is a valid scenario. The warning should only be triggered when this_chunk is negative. Fixes: 1ec9daf95093 ("net: netconsole: append userdata to fragmented netconsole messages") Signed-off-by: Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org> Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org> Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20241008094325.896208-1-leitao@debian.org Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'drivers/net/netconsole.c')
-rw-r--r--drivers/net/netconsole.c8
1 files changed, 7 insertions, 1 deletions
diff --git a/drivers/net/netconsole.c b/drivers/net/netconsole.c
index 01cf33fa7503..de20928f7402 100644
--- a/drivers/net/netconsole.c
+++ b/drivers/net/netconsole.c
@@ -1161,8 +1161,14 @@ static void send_ext_msg_udp(struct netconsole_target *nt, const char *msg,
this_chunk = min(userdata_len - sent_userdata,
MAX_PRINT_CHUNK - preceding_bytes);
- if (WARN_ON_ONCE(this_chunk <= 0))
+ if (WARN_ON_ONCE(this_chunk < 0))
+ /* this_chunk could be zero if all the previous
+ * message used all the buffer. This is not a
+ * problem, userdata will be sent in the next
+ * iteration
+ */
return;
+
memcpy(buf + this_header + this_offset,
userdata + sent_userdata,
this_chunk);