Profile

Join date: May 13, 2022

About
0 Like Received
0 Comment Received
0 Best Answer

Patchpes60soundafs [2022-Latest]



 


Download: https://byltly.com/2k14ed





 

On Thu, 11 Dec 2017 19:16:00 +0900, K. J. McMullen wrote: > On Wednesday, December 10, 2017, Matthieu Herrb wrote: > > I don't understand why this is a problem. >> It is not a problem, but it is a limitation. We have no way to > properly clean up the value after using it. [...] > >So, I use memcpy() because it > >feels safe. I think memcpy() is broken and causes race conditions, > >and the kernel programmers should use memcpy_safe() instead. > >So, we have a new solution: pcap_get_tstamp() is the C > >solution. It is safer, because it is single-threaded and we have no > >open fds. But it is slow and expensive. > What I have in mind is something like : > > struct pcap_tstamp_x86 { >... > // Returns pcap_tstamp_x86 as structure, or NULL on error. > }; Yes, that's a possible solution. > pcap_tstamp_x86(void *pcap_tstamp) > { > if (memcpy_user(pcap_tstamp, pcap_tstamp_x86, sizeof(struct pcap_tstamp_x86))) > return NULL; > return pcap_tstamp; } > struct pcap_tstamp_amd64 { > // Returns pcap_tstamp_amd64 as structure, or NULL on error. > pcap_tstamp_amd64(void *pcap_tstamp) > if (memcpy_user(pcap_tstamp, pcap_tstamp_amd64, sizeof(struct pcap_tstamp_amd64))) > struct pcap_tstamp_x86_64 { > // Returns pcap_tstamp_x86

 

 


KMS (KMS Cleaner)2.2

memin pinguin 51 100 pdf

solucionario finanzas corporativas berk.12

Internet Access Monitor Kerio 3.9 Crack

F1F9MacroRedoneFinalexe


Patchpes60soundafs [2022-Latest]

More actions