linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] kernel-shark: fix unitialized handle compile warnings

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]

Message-ID: <1265213945.24386.2.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
Date:	Wed, 03 Feb 2010 11:19:05 -0500
From:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:	John Kacur <jkacur@...hat.com>
Cc:	Darren Hart <dvhltc@...ibm.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] kernel-shark: fix unitialized handle compile
 warnings

On Wed, 2010-02-03 at 11:17 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> andle)
> > > -               handle = tracecmd_open(input_file);
> > > +       handle = tracecmd_open(input_file);
> > >
> > > -       info->handle = handle;
> > > +       if (handle)
> > > +               info->handle = handle;
> > >
> > >        /* --- Main window --- */
> > >
> > > --
> > 
> > This looks correct, but I'm wondering if it is safe to continue if the
> > call to tracecmd_open fails?
> 
> Actually this patch is wrong. The real code should be:
> 
> -	if (handle)
> +	if (input_file)

Looking at the context, this isn't enough. We should have had:

	if (input_file)
		info->handle = tracecmd_open(input_file);
	else
		info->handle = NULL;

-- Steve


--
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/