mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>
To: Angelos Oikonomopoulos <angelos@igalia.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Cc: catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-dev@igalia.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: Don't call NULL in do_compat_alignment_fixup
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2025 13:52:24 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <c5d835bc-883d-449f-afd3-16a09e418e1b@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <D8V5E7FT19GH.3EUO3I50GYF8J@igalia.com>



On 4/1/25 13:39, Angelos Oikonomopoulos wrote:
> On Tue Apr 1, 2025 at 9:47 AM CEST, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 4/1/25 12:28, Angelos Oikonomopoulos wrote:
>>> On Tue Apr 1, 2025 at 8:05 AM CEST, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
>>>> On 3/31/25 14:24, Angelos Oikonomopoulos wrote:
> [...]
>>>>>  arch/arm64/kernel/compat_alignment.c | 2 ++
>>>>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/compat_alignment.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/compat_alignment.c
>>>>> index deff21bfa680..b68e1d328d4c 100644
>>>>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/compat_alignment.c
>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/compat_alignment.c
>>>>> @@ -368,6 +368,8 @@ int do_compat_alignment_fixup(unsigned long addr, struct pt_regs *regs)
>>>>>  		return 1;
>>>>>  	}
>>>>>  
>>>>> +	if (!handler)
>>>>> +		return 1;
>>>>
>>>> do_alignment_t32_to_handler() could return NULL, returning 1 seems to be
>>>> the right thing to do here and consistent. Otherwise does this cause a
>>>> kernel crash during subsequent call into handler() ?
>>>
>>> Yes. We call a NULL pointer so we Oops.
>>
>> Then the commit message should have the kernel Oops splash dump and also
>> might need to have Fixes: and CC: stable tags etc ?
> 
> Sure, I can add those. Thanks for the suggestions!
> 
>> Also wondering if handler return value should be checked inside the switch
>> block just after do_alignment_t32_to_handler() assignment.
>>
>> 	handler = do_alignment_t32_to_handler()
>> 	if (!handler)
>> 		return 1
> 
> I can see the appeal of that, but I think placing the check right before
> the single dereference is a more future-proof fix, in that it reduce the
> chances that a later patch will re-introduce a potential NULL pointer
> dereference.

Makes sense. A small nit - just wondering if the following restructuring
here would make things bit more readable ? Regardless, your decision.

	if (handler)
        	type = handler(addr, instr, regs);
        else
                return 1;
> 
> Angelos
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2025-04-01  8:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-03-31  8:54 Angelos Oikonomopoulos
2025-04-01  6:05 ` Anshuman Khandual
2025-04-01  6:58   ` Angelos Oikonomopoulos
2025-04-01  7:47     ` Anshuman Khandual
2025-04-01  8:09       ` Angelos Oikonomopoulos
2025-04-01  8:22         ` Anshuman Khandual [this message]
2025-04-01  8:58           ` Angelos Oikonomopoulos
2025-04-04 13:58             ` Will Deacon
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2025-03-26 13:35 Angelos Oikonomopoulos
2025-03-28 19:06 ` Catalin Marinas
2025-03-31  7:57   ` Angelos Oikonomopoulos

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=c5d835bc-883d-449f-afd3-16a09e418e1b@arm.com \
    --to=anshuman.khandual@arm.com \
    --cc=angelos@igalia.com \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=kernel-dev@igalia.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    /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®