From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
To: Darren Hart <dvhart@infradead.org>
Cc: Colin King <colin.king@canonical.com>,
Sujith Thomas <sujith.thomas@intel.com>,
platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] intel_menlow: set cdev after null device check to avoid null pointer dereference
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2016 15:13:43 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4083784.LDUSFcvSJY@vostro.rjw.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160328181805.GC26086@dvhart-mobl5.amr.corp.intel.com>
On Monday, March 28, 2016 11:18:05 AM Darren Hart wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 05:18:39PM +0100, Colin King wrote:
> > From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>
> >
> > intel_menlow_memory_remove sanity checks to see if device is null, however,
> > this check is performed after we have already passed device into a call
> > to acpi_driver_data. If device is null, then acpi_driver_data will produce
> > a null pointer dereference on device. The correct action is to sanity check
> > device, then assign cdev, then check if cdev is null.
> >
>
> Hrm, looking at this locally, that all makes sense.
>
> Taking a step back however, I notice that intel_menlow_memory_remove is an ops
> function pointer inside the acpi_driver structure itself, which is called from
> acpi_device_remove() (and probe) (drivers/acpi/bus.c). This already verifies
> acpi_driver is not NULL and can't get acpi_driver if acpi_device is NULL. So
> unless there is some other use case for this callback I'm unaware of (certainly
> possible) it appears to be totally redundant to do this checking here.
>
> +Rafael - is there a best practices for these acpi callbacks with respect to
> input validation?
No best practices I'm aware of, but if the core does this checks anyway before
calling this, they are clearly not necessary here.
Thanks,
Rafael
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-29 13:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-03-28 16:18 Colin King
2016-03-28 18:18 ` Darren Hart
2016-03-29 13:13 ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2016-04-10 2:34 ` Darren Hart
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4083784.LDUSFcvSJY@vostro.rjw.lan \
--to=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=colin.king@canonical.com \
--cc=dvhart@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sujith.thomas@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®