lwIP - A Lightweight TCP/IP stack - Bugs: bug #43081, The crash error for the active...
You are not allowed to post comments on this tracker with your current authentication level.
bug #43081: The crash error for the active LWIP_NETBUF_RECVINFO option in api_msg.c (lwip-1.4.1)
Submitter: | Przemyslaw Bejtan <przemyslawbejtan> | ||
Submitted: | Tue 26 Aug 2014 05:06:11 PM UTC | ||
Category: | Network drivers | Severity: | 3 - Normal |
Item Group: | Crash Error | Status: | Fixed |
Privacy: | Public | Assigned to: | goldsimon |
Open/Closed: | Closed | Planned Release: | None |
lwIP version: | 1.4.1 |
Jump to the original submission
Tue 02 Sep 2014 07:55:23 PM UTC, comment #6: |
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Wed 27 Aug 2014 01:45:58 PM UTC, comment #5: The comment formatting is messing things up. It is combining "* )" into bold formatting. So there never was a (void) cast
|
Joel Cunningham <jcunningham> |
Wed 27 Aug 2014 01:42:25 PM UTC, comment #4: Why not use the correct type in the cast?
|
Joel Cunningham <jcunningham> |
Wed 27 Aug 2014 06:42:52 AM UTC, comment #3: Sorry,
|
Przemyslaw Bejtan <przemyslawbejtan> |
Wed 27 Aug 2014 06:38:12 AM UTC, comment #2: Yes, you are right. Analyzing deeper original line 184, we can see the additional mistake. The calculation formula of “*udphdr” address is incorrect, because “IPH_LEN(iphdr)” refers to the length of entire IP package, but it should refer only to the header length of this package. Your solution is OK, but to be precise, it should be:
|
Przemyslaw Bejtan <przemyslawbejtan> |
Tue 26 Aug 2014 07:40:38 PM UTC, comment #1: I've come across the same behavior and I think the fix is slightly different:
|
Joel Cunningham <jcunningham> |
Tue 26 Aug 2014 05:06:11 PM UTC, original submission:
The crash error for the active LWIP_NETBUF_RECVINFO option in api_msg.c (lwip-1.4.1).
|
Przemyslaw Bejtan <przemyslawbejtan> |
No files currently attached
Depends on the following items: None found
Items that depend on this one: None found
There are 0 votes so far. Votes easily highlight which items people would like to see resolved in priority, independently of the priority of the item set by tracker managers.
Follow 4 latest changes.
Date | Changed by | Updated Field | Previous Value | => | Replaced by |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2014-09-02 | goldsimon | Status | None | Fixed | |
Assigned to | None | goldsimon | |||
Open/Closed | Open | Closed | |||
Planned Release | 1.5.0 |
Powered by Savane 3.13-4448.
Corresponding source code
Re comment #1:
You're right. How can that ever have worked?
Any way, this has already been fixed a while ago in git master when implementing IPv6 support.