linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ACPI: Fix potential NULL pointer dereference in acpi_processor

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 31 May 2013 14:08:40 +0200
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To:	Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>
Cc:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Martin Mokrejs <mmokrejs@...d.natur.cuni.cz>,
	linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	patches@...aro.org, linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACPI: Fix potential NULL pointer dereference in acpi_processor_add()

On Friday, May 31, 2013 11:58:49 AM Hanjun Guo wrote:
> On 2013-5-31 6:25, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 03:57:58PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >> On Thursday, May 30, 2013 10:29:54 AM Hanjun Guo wrote:
> >>> On 2013-5-29 19:07, Martin Mokrejs wrote:
> >>>> Hanjun Guo wrote:
> >>>>> On 2013-5-29 7:30, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >>>>>> On Thursday, May 23, 2013 08:44:26 PM Hanjun Guo wrote:
> >>>>>>> In acpi_processor_add(), get_cpu_device() will return NULL sometimes,
> >>>>>>> although the chances are small, I think it should be fixed.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> This patch isn't necessary any more after the changes queued up for 3.11
> >>>>>> in the acpi-hotplug branch of the linux-pm.git tree.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Ok, I noticed your patch set, just drop my patch.
> >>>>
> >>>> But shouldn't this go to stable at least? I checked linux-3.9.4
> >>>> and it applies fine. Whether this is relevant for other stable
> >>>> series I will leave up to somebody else. ;)
> >>>
> >>> Hi Rafeal,
> >>>
> >>> What's your opinion on Martin's suggestion?
> >>
> >> Well, this is kind of hard to say.  We generally don't apply patches to -stable
> >> that don't have mainline counterparts.
> >>
> >> Greg, I wonder what your opinion is?
> > 
> > We do not apply patches to -stable that are not in Linus's tree, unless
> > there is no problem in Linus's tree due to a major rewrite of the code,
> > and it has been confirmed that the same problem isn't there.
> 
> Hi Rafael,
> 
> I found that the problem is still there in your acpi-hotplug tree, sorry for
> I didn't noticed early. I made a patch for this again, I hope it will make
> sense to you.
> 
> The patch is attached, based on your acpi-hotplug tree.

OK, thanks!

Rafael


-- 
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
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/