[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALF0-+WPZ7b83Mg=b1KirHt39QE4fuO4MDGhNpQNxMY09O87HA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 12:28:15 -0300
From: Ezequiel Garcia <elezegarcia@...il.com>
To: Peter Senna Tschudin <peter.senna@...il.com>
Cc: pawel@...iak.com, m.szyprowski@...sung.com,
kyungmin.park@...sung.com, mchehab@...radead.org,
linux-media@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] drivers/media/v4l2-core/videobuf2-core.c: fix error
return code
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 11:47 AM, Peter Senna Tschudin
<peter.senna@...il.com> wrote:
> This patch fixes a NULL pointer dereference bug at __vb2_init_fileio().
> The NULL pointer deference happens at videobuf2-core.c:
>
> static size_t __vb2_perform_fileio(struct vb2_queue *q, char __user *data, size_t count,
> loff_t *ppos, int nonblock, int read)
> {
> ...
> if (!q->fileio) {
> ret = __vb2_init_fileio(q, read);
> dprintk(3, "file io: vb2_init_fileio result: %d\n", ret);
> if (ret)
> return ret;
> }
> fileio = q->fileio; // NULL pointer deference here
> ...
> }
>
> It was tested with vivi driver and qv4l2 for selecting read() as capture method.
> The OOPS happened when I've artificially forced the error by commenting the line:
> if (fileio->bufs[i].vaddr == NULL)
>
... but if you manually changed the original source, how
can this be a real BUG?
Or am I missing something here ?
Ezequiel
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists