Frankly, conversation structures shouldn't have per-packet data in
them at all; this was probably the easiest way to fix the fuzz
failure, but it really seems odd to me that it even needs to be done.
Thoughts?
On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 4:20 PM, Wireshark code review
<code-review-do-not-reply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> URL: https://code.wireshark.org/review/gitweb?p=wireshark.git;a=commit;h=119406192fcd909ae92a8d662ae1096eb9558019
> Submitter: Martin Kaiser (wireshark@xxxxxxxxx)
> Changed: branch: master
> Repository: wireshark
>
> Commits:
>
> 1194061 by Martin Kaiser (wireshark@xxxxxxxxx):
>
> clear the temporary components of usb_conv_info_t before we dissect a
> new packet
>
> this fixes the fuzz failures in
> https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10386
>
> Change-Id: I8c0ba8c8da9af8d7a3ef9cdd7781769b9966f1a2
> Reviewed-on: https://code.wireshark.org/review/3727
> Reviewed-by: Martin Kaiser <wireshark@xxxxxxxxx>
> Tested-by: Martin Kaiser <wireshark@xxxxxxxxx>
>
>
> Actions performed:
>
> from 8c84a23 these two vars are initialized to NULL, we don't have to set them to NULL again
> adds 1194061 clear the temporary components of usb_conv_info_t before we dissect a new packet
>
>
> Summary of changes:
> epan/dissectors/packet-usb.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> epan/dissectors/packet-usb.h | 1 +
> 2 files changed, 35 insertions(+)
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> Sent via: Wireshark-commits mailing list <wireshark-commits@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-commits
> Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-commits
> mailto:wireshark-commits-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
