linux-kernel - Re: + cifs-check-for-granted-memory.patch added to -mm tree

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <9a8748490708171517m4c6f1330jf7990b68cebe4768@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sat, 18 Aug 2007 00:17:33 +0200
From:	"Jesper Juhl" <jesper.juhl@...il.com>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	mm-commits@...r.kernel.org, gorcunov@...il.com, sfrench@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: + cifs-check-for-granted-memory.patch added to -mm tree

On 17/08/07, akpm@...ux-foundation.org <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> The patch titled
>      CIFS: check for granted memory
> has been added to the -mm tree.  Its filename is
>      cifs-check-for-granted-memory.patch
>
> *** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***
>
> See http://www.zip.com.au/~akpm/linux/patches/stuff/added-to-mm.txt to find
> out what to do about this
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Subject: CIFS: check for granted memory
> From: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>
>
> Add a check for granted memory to prevent possible NULL pointer usage.
>
> Signed-off-by: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>
> Cc: Steven French <sfrench@...ibm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
> ---
>
>  fs/cifs/sess.c |    4 ++++
>  1 files changed, 4 insertions(+)
>
> diff -puN fs/cifs/sess.c~cifs-check-for-granted-memory fs/cifs/sess.c
> --- a/fs/cifs/sess.c~cifs-check-for-granted-memory
> +++ a/fs/cifs/sess.c
> @@ -372,6 +372,10 @@ CIFS_SessSetup(unsigned int xid, struct
>
>         /* 2000 big enough to fit max user, domain, NOS name etc. */
>         str_area = kmalloc(2000, GFP_KERNEL);
> +       if (str_area == NULL) {
> +               cifs_small_buf_release(smb_buf);
> +               return -ENOMEM;
> +       }

The patch, as such, is fine - not arguing against it, but as a matter
of style; don't we usually prefer the "if (!foo)" form over "if (foo
== NULL)" ??

-- 
Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@...il.com>
Don't top-post  http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html
Plain text mails only, please      http://www.expita.com/nomime.html
-
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/