linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] fix parport_serial_pci_resume() ignoring return value from pci_enable

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 13 Oct 2006 00:58:21 +0100
From:	Russell King <rmk+lkml@....linux.org.uk>
To:	Jiri Kosina <jikos@...os.cz>
Cc:	Phil Blundell <philb@....org>, Tim Waugh <tim@...erelk.net>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-parport@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix parport_serial_pci_resume() ignoring return value from pci_enable_device()

On Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 01:44:24AM +0200, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> (I guess that the parport_serial_pci_remove() is the right way(tm) to 
> remove the device from the system in non-destructive way even in case 
> pci_enable_device() failed. Tim?)

I suspect all these kind of patches are introducing additional problems.
This one certainly is.  Who's auditing all these patches?  I mean _properly_
auditing them rather than just saying "that's a good idea"?

In this case, you're calling parport_serial_pci_remove() in the failure
path.  That's fine, but this opens the possibility of it being called
twice - once on resume failure and once when the device/driver is
removed.  If this happens, we dereference a NULL pointer. *BAD*.

So, the original without this resume fix is probably far better than
with the fix.

So, patch violently rejected.

-- 
Russell King
 Linux kernel    2.6 ARM Linux   - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
 maintainer of:  2.6 Serial core
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/