the top-level
(by using a bold font on any item which is either new or has new
sub-items) so that users get a clear view of what they may need to
configure.
Sam
--
Samuel Tardieu -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.rfc1149.net/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscri
enabled by default? Omitting it would save 10k of kernel
text on x86 and people will see the new kernel configuration option
anyway and will enable it if needed.
Sam
--
Samuel Tardieu -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.rfc1149.net/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubsc
On 3/10, Jean Tourrilhes wrote:
| > I suggest that you revert the memset() to IW_ESSID_MAX_SIZE+1 so that
| > the last byte is cleared as well. Or am I missing something?
|
| No, that would bring back the slab/memory overflow we are
| trying to get rid of.
Then I am puzzled by the function decl
ere may be a bug (no '\0' at
the end of buf)
- either buf is not-supposed to be nul-terminated and the length
value will always be used, in which case the memset() looks
useless
I suggest that you revert the memset() to IW_ESSID_MAX_SIZE+1 so that
the last byte is cleared
n hardware.
Would userspace programs benefit from this patch? In particular, would
OpenSSL get better performances on Via nehemiah CPUs or does it need
to be patched?
Sam
--
Samuel Tardieu -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.rfc1149.net/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsu
